More stories

  • in

    What makes us human? How minds develop through social interactions

    Just how social we are as a species is made even more evident by the COVID-19 lockdowns that have restricted our everyday social interactions and affected our physical and mental health. Social engagement influences us at an even more fundamental level because it is crucial to the formation of human thinking and minds. We address this issue in What Makes Us Human? How Minds Develop Through Social Interactions. In the words of a 9-year-old, the question is, “How do you go from a bunch of cells to something that thinks?” How are we as humans able to explore such questions about our own origins and the workings of our minds? Humans are intrigued by the possibility of intelligent life elsewhere in the universe, but a puzzle unfolding right before our eyes is how intelligence develops in our homes as babies start to communicate and then understand the world in ways that adults simply take for granted. In our book, we develop and justify the idea that the essential aspects of being human arise through our relations with other people. To understand these processes and the way human intellect develops, it is essential to look closely at the nature of communication in infancy and childhood, with which much of our thinking is intricately entwined. To explore the complexities of human language, we begin by describing the rich social and emotional niches in which human babies develop and the forms of interaction on which communication is based emerge. We develop and justify the idea that the essential aspects of being human arise through our relations with other people. Have you ever considered why human infants are born so helpless that they must be cared for over many years, yet they develop such powerful ways of thinking? Our answer to this question follows a historical tradition that suggests that this helplessness is an important factor in the development of human thinking. This is because the need for constant care in the early years necessarily produces a social context in which complex human skills develop. Although the infant is unable to fend for herself, she is born with a host of evolved biological characteristics that draw her into engagement with others. For example, typically developing babies are interested in looking at human eyes, which are particularly striking compared to the eyes of other primates because the dark center is surrounded by contrasting white sclera. Such attentiveness to eyes may be interpreted as indicating babies’ apparent interest in other people, and this interest is typically reciprocated by parents, who love to engage with their infants. This bidirectional process of attentiveness promotes the infant’s development. Initially, this consists of staring into the eyes of a caregiver, or cuddling into the caregiver for comfort, but these early and simple skills soon develop into more complex abilities like smiling or cooing. These new forms of interaction elicit even more positive experiences because they are so rewarding for parents. This repeated daily social interaction between infants and their parents becomes increasingly coordinated, which reflects early forms of communication. For instance, when a baby reaches her arms toward her parent, the meaning of this action — a desire to be held — is clear to the parent, who typically picks up the baby. Through experiencing this response to her reaching, the baby learns to anticipate this outcome of her reaching action. That is, she comes to grasp the meaning that her action has for others and then she gradually learns to communicate this desire intentionally. This is a crucial change in ways of interacting, not seen to such an extent in other species that lack an extended period of helplessness: The baby becomes aware of the meaning in the interaction and can then anticipate the response and communicate intentionally. Later, she can learn to add words such as up or uppy to these sorts of shared social routines. Other acts, such as mutually sharing a toy with a caregiver or gesturing in a specific way, develop in a similar fashion as their meaning emerges within shared patterns of interaction. Beginning at about 10 to 12 months, babies typically start to point, but not in a sophisticated way. It takes a lot of experience to realize that successful pointing involves the pointer gesturing to the object and checking that the receiver is following the line of the point. It also requires the receiver to identify what is being pointed to and why their attention is being drawn to it. The hard-won reading of these sorts of gestures reveals the origins and nature of children’s understanding of other people. It shows how a grasp of simple experiences like reaching to be picked up facilitates further interaction in which children develop yet more complex communicative and social skills. These are concrete examples of how increasingly sophisticated human thinking and minds emerge as communication develops in everyday interaction, a fact that makes their significance easy to overlook. They are instances of the sort of mundane interactions on which human ways of being and thinking are based. The use of words is an extension of earlier communication with gestures. Language gradually becomes part of the way thinking can take place. Initially, the baby’s words refer to objects and actions in the here and now, but gradually they can be applied to experiences not directly perceptible – for example, toddlers can relate what happened at preschool or make up a story about an imaginary character. More sophisticated forms of social understanding emerge when children gradually master the language skills needed to talk about human activity in psychological terms. Most toddlers articulate what they want with words by age two, and soon afterwards use words like think and know to show that they are aware that they and the people around them are influenced by their own thoughts and motivations. By acquiring the ability to talk about the psychological world, children can begin to reflect on themselves and others in these ways. From the perspective we have developed here, morality emerges at the level of interaction as children learn to coordinate their daily activities with others in relationships of mutual affection and respect. These interactions based on equality are well suited for reaching mutual understanding because they require children to listen to others and explain themselves. This allows them to coordinate conflicts and develop a practical morality in their interaction with equals. A further step is to begin to articulate what was first implicit in their activity, which then makes reflection possible. In this way, children become able to articulate and reflect on their initially practical ways of interacting with others. Moral notions such as fairness and justice do not have their source in biology alone, nor are they pre-existing and passed on from a previous generation to be imposed on children. Instead, they arise through particular forms of cooperative interaction among equals based on mutual affection and respect. To understand the way human intellect develops it is essential to look closely at the nature of communication in infancy and childhood, with which much of our thinking is intricately entwined. Of course, explaining the origins of human thinking is controversial and not everyone will agree with our account. In our book, we compare our developmental account, which is grounded in the processes of social interaction, with two competing explanations for human thinking: that it is either simply determined by biology or that the computer makes a good metaphor for the human mind. First, we show that although biological factors are crucial in structuring the developmental system in which human skills emerge, the claim that thinking is determined by genes is incompatible with work in biology over the last 50 years. Research in genetics and developmental neurobiology highlights that we must consider the complex developmental system in which multiple levels of biology and environment interact with each other to drive the individual’s development. Key aspects of human thinking, although based on neural activity, emerge only at the level of the person interacting with others. Second, the claim that thinking can be likened to computation is based on a flawed assumption that meaning is fixed, as it is in a computer. Instead, as we illustrate, human communication is rooted in shared ways of interacting. This is also why current approaches to artificial intelligence that attempt to model human intelligence are based on the wrong foundation. Revealing the flaws in these two general approaches to human psychological development supports our argument that human communication and thinking emerges within interaction with others in a developmental system in which biological and social levels are thoroughly interwoven. We trace this development by beginning as gestures emerge in early interaction, leading to language and then to human forms of thinking. Header photo: Gigin Krishnan. Creative Commons.  More

  • in

    Care for children by caring for parents, says neuroscience

    Early emotional experiences leave children with much more than memories. Neuroscience suggests how these experiences can literally shape the ways in which children – and the adults they become – think. These early experiences contribute to the development of the biological mechanisms that process and interpret past and future experiences. They can influence brain circuitry that makes meaning from what has happened and predictions for what happens next, sometimes throughout children’s lives.
    These insights from neuroscience place parents – not only their actions but also their well-being — at the heart of children’s brain development for two reasons.
    First, parents are usually the source of their children’s earliest experiences and those who are likely to influence brain development. The nature of this relationship highlights the importance of understanding these experiences.
    Second, parents also provide a buffer between the world and young children’s brain development. If parents can manage the stresses the world throws at them, then children may learn how to manage challenges better. Children are also more likely to be protected from biological responses to adverse events. In contrast, when parents are overtaxed and have difficulty regulating themselves, children may be more vulnerable to external stressors.
    This understanding of how moms and dads influence children’s brain development makes a fresh and compelling case for supporting parenting. It also demands action to help ensure that parents are supported and buffered. It means that, if we care about children, then we as a society should care a lot for their parents.

    “A parent is an extension of a child’s developing neurobiology – like an interpersonal scaffolding that affords a long childhood.”

    This understanding of children’s neural development springs from observing how the brain functions. My colleagues and I have looked at a key communication inside a particular part of the brain — between the subcortical brain regions and the medial prefrontal cortex. These areas support and link emotional learning with subsequent emotional behaviors.
    Subcortical brain regions learn at a deep level about positive and negative events, and they create emotional memories. Meanwhile, the medial prefrontal cortex is involved in managing behaviors, as well as in planning and decision making. These two areas are connected and therefore, communicate with each other. The patterns individuals establish in making meaning seem to influence how they interpret what happens and how they make decisions.
    We have observed how these regions of the brain are influenced by early experiences. We can also see how they are then used in later life. This helps us understand how childhood experiences may play out and influence subsequent adult behaviors.
    Forming the neurobiology of the childhood brain
    What happens in the early building of these brain regions? They develop rapidly during early childhood so they are very vulnerable to environmental influences, whether nurturing or maltreating. These areas of the brain learn about security and threat, create emotional memories, and are involved in managing behavior and decision making. Intriguingly, we have also found that these areas are very sensitive to parents and to the messages or cues parents send to children.
    Photo: NeONBRAND. Unsplash.

    Why does it serve human welfare to be so heavily influenced by these early experiences? Because, as a species, humans have evolved to learn from our early environments so we are ready for what we encounter once we reach maturity. The human brain develops very slowly compared with other species – it’s on a “slow cook” setting. This is a great adaptation that gives us a lot of time to learn from our environments.
    Some have said that childhood is a dress rehearsal for the performance of adulthood. The longer the dress rehearsal, the longer we get to stay immature, and the more efficient and powerful the adult brain becomes to help us tackle the drama on life’s stage.
    A child’s brain is primed to learn from its closest environment, especially early in life. That makes family and parents a big influence on emotional development. Human children spend a very long time with their parents, compared with other species. This time affords them a lengthy period of brain plasticity — the first two decades of life — during which they can do the massive amount of learning required for the sophisticated set of behaviors human adults need.
    The role of parents’ neurobiology
    Although parents are not the sole source of input, they provide the bulk of that learning. Part of that learning, especially early in life, springs from the way parents regulate their children’s stress biology (consciously or not). The neurobiology involved in social and emotional behavior is enriched with stress hormone receptors that prompt the body to respond biologically to what is happening. However, the mere physical presence of a parent can reduce the release of these stress hormones in a child.
    Mom or dad can also decrease the firing of a child’s amygdala, one of the brain’s subcortical structures that is involved in learning about fear. A parent is an extension of a child’s developing neurobiology –like an interpersonal scaffolding that affords a long childhood. However, this scaffolding can also create a perilous situation when it is difficult for a caregiving environment to be an effective buffer of threat or may even be a source of threat, rather than security, to the child.

    “[We must] ensure that parents are supported and buffered. It means that, if we care about children, then we as a society should care a lot for their parents.”

    The power of parents as buffers has been demonstrated in studies with rodents. In an experiment that associated a meaningless stimulus – such as peppermint odor – with a mild shock to the foot, young rats learned to dislike the odor (as you and I would) and their amygdala responded to that learning. However, when the rat’s parent was present, the developing rodent, despite smelling the scent and experiencing the shock, did not avoid the smell. Functionally, the presence of the parent blocked the young rodent’s amygdala from reacting. Indeed, the rodent actually showed a preference for the odor. This sounds bizarre, but we have duplicated these findings in experiments with preschool-age children.
    These reactions occur because early in life, humans are primed, as dependents on their parents, to form preferences for things associated with them – regardless of how pleasant or unpleasant the stimulus. For example, my father smoked cigars. I know the smell is unpleasant. However, that odor was learned in the context of my attachment to my father, so  I remain drawn to this stimulus. Most people can probably think of things associated with the home (“the nest”) to which they are attracted, regardless of whether they are pleasant or unpleasant. This response is part of a young animal’s survival strategy.
    Usually this system works well — it keeps us close to our parents, the nest, and the developmental benefits mom and dad bring. However, this system may also explain why, even in the context of harsh early environments, children still form attachments to their parents and things associated with them. This understanding helps explain why children often resist being separated from a parent even where there is maltreatment. It highlights the difficult and complex issues involved in separating any child from his or her parent.
    The adult brain and its inheritance from childhood
    Next, let us think about the adult brain: How do these brain circuits, shaped by early experiences during childhood, work later in life? Studies show that these neural circuits are activated when adults are trying to manage strong emotions, say, after a really bad day at work or when someone needs to calm down. The same neurobiology – between the prefrontal cortex and the subcortical regions – is involved when we lack complete information and need to fill in the gaps to understand fully what is happening.
    Taken together, these observations of the brain suggest that early experiences may influence future behavior by providing a template for understanding how the world works. One person’s templates differ from another’s. Such templates are presumably supported, at least in part, by subcortical regions and the medial prefrontal cortex.
    In situations of incomplete knowledge, a template influences an individual’s predictions of what a situation means and guides the response. Thus, matching what behavioral psychologists described more than 60 years ago, neuroscience can provide a biological model of how early experiences with parents and other caregivers form templates that influence how adults operate socially and emotionally, sometimes throughout their lives.
    To care for children, care for their parents
    All this demonstrates how important it is that parents themselves feel supported and are well-regulated. When parents are overly distressed, they may find it difficult to effectively buffer their children’s stress biology. However, when parents themselves are well and feel relatively secure, they are probably more effective than any other intervention in managing their children’s emotional reactions.
    Parents are powerful; they are the conduits of the emotional world to their children. This is easy to see in everyday life: If parents react well to something, their child often will do the same. If parents respond in a calm way, their child will likely follow that lead. In certain senses, parents are an extension of their children’s developing brain. For that reason, we should consider: How can we support families so parents regulate themselves well to help their children become well-regulated?
    Certain policies around parenting place children’s mental health at risk. For example, imagine the problems caused by the policy of separating children from parents who tried to cross from Mexico to the United States without visas. There are other areas of policy to consider. For example, how should we shape employment practices to ensure that mothers and fathers are sufficiently present in their children’s lives to provide a calm buffer against adverse experiences? How can we ensure parents’ mental, physical, and economic well-being so their wellness protects their children?
    Childhood adversity is the leading environmental risk factor for mental health problems. Many of these problems are preventable – they are not genetically determined from birth. That’s why, if we are serious about caring for children, we must care for parents.
    Parents ask me, “What is the best parenting advice you can offer?” I tell them, “Do what you can to take care of your well-being, to make sure you are feeling safe, and to manage your own emotions in a healthy way. When you feel this way, that gets translated to your children in a powerful way.”
    Header photo: Gita Krishnamurti. Unsplash.  More

  • in

    Nurturing curiosity and invention: How parents can put their children on the path to innovation

    In December 2020, Gitanjali Rao, a 15-year-old inventor from Colorado, was named Kid of the Year by Newsweek. Showered with accolades, children like Rao are often treated as if they are unicorns, completely different than others their age. But that need not be the case. Virtually everyone begins life with the necessary building blocks to construct new ideas (defined here as a solution to a problem or an explanation for phenomena). However, by age five, only some children are still on a path to become adept at such thinking, while most leave it farther and farther behind. But such a fate is not inevitable.
    What would it take to help all children be able and eager to pursue ideas? The answer lies in two processes that begin during the early years: inquiry and invention. If you have ever watched three-year-olds at play, you have seen how children first pursue ideas. It usually begins with a problem: A child wants to fashion a tent out of blankets and pillows, understand why some bugs fly and others do not, or figure out how far the stars extend in the sky. Parents and teachers can fan the flames of children’s natural drive to think things through. To do so, adults should give children plenty of opportunities to solve the problems that grab them, spend time talking with them about the intellectual puzzles that haunt them, and guide them to test their speculations and revise their ideas. Parents and teachers should also be willing to talk with children about things that are unfamiliar, unknown, and perhaps even uncomfortable. By building on children’s powerful drive to inquire, invent, and mull over complex problems, adults can help them become avid, supple, and astute thinkers.

    “What would it take to help all children be able and eager to pursue ideas?  The answer lies in two processes that begin during the early years: inquiry and invention.”

    Eager to learn from the start
    Babies are born curious, equipped with antenna for detecting novelty. From early on, they notice when a new object or event comes within view or earshot. Research suggests that infants become familiar with their mothers’ tone and cadence while in utero. Soon after birth, most babies respond differently when someone other than their caregiver talks to them. Within months, whenever they see something different from what they have seen before, their heartbeat slows, their breath quickens, and their skin produces more moisture — all signs that they have taken notice.
    Watching visual patterns or images projected onto a screen, babies look longer at the one they have never seen before. They absorb the new phenomena, looking and listening until they see something that is no longer surprising. But they quickly go beyond using just their ears and eyes. Soon enough, babies expand their investigative repertoire to include touching, grasping, licking, and mouthing. By two-and-a-half years, they have acquired an explosively more powerful tool for investigating the world: questions. Toddlers can ask about items around them, but also about the past, the future, and the unseen. Since so much of their daily lives brings them face to face with new sights and sounds, their novelty detectors go off all day long, leading to a day crammed with investigation.

    “Adults should give children plenty of opportunities to solve the problems that grab them, spend time talking with them about the intellectual puzzles that haunt them, and guide them to test their speculations and revise their ideas.”

    Compared to other mammals, human newborns seem helpless; after all, other mammals walk and nourish themselves within hours of life. Yet by their third year, humans have learned a dazzling array of information and skills never available to the smartest dog, horse, or pig. The newborn cries and makes vegetative noises, but the three-year-old talks in full sentences; can carry on complex conversations; refers to the past and the future; and can tell intricate stories that include characters, plots, and surprise endings. Children’s urge to investigate explains how helpless infants, who merely burp, gurgle, kick, and cry, become savvy members of the community in just three years. Curiosity is the psychological foundation that explains the vast terrain of knowledge and skills acquired, apparently effortlessly, by all typically developing children.
    Photo: Difei Li. Creative Commons.

     The power of specific interests
    But the endless barrage of surprises and mysteries does not last forever. By the time children are three, they have a huge working knowledge of their everyday routines and environments. They know what will be on the breakfast table, the kinds of things their family members typically do and say, and what will happen on a trip to the grocery store. The everyday world becomes the familiar background to more distinctive events and objects, which call out for further explanation and mastery.
    At this point, children are ready to be somewhat choosier. They begin to play a more active role in deciding what aspects of daily life they can skim over and which to zero in on. While virtually all 18-month-olds seem inquisitive most of their waking days, four-year-olds are likely to seem blasé about many aspects of daily life: the trip to school, a visit from a neighbor, or the pigeons out the window. During this period, when daily life becomes mundane, most children develop specific interests. One becomes fascinated with bugs, another intent on watching to see what makes people laugh, and a third absorbed by small gadgets. But not all children focus on objects or creatures. Some collect information about the invisible or ungraspable, for instance, god, death, or infinity. In an examination of a large database of two-five year olds talking at home, children often asked many questions about such topics across relatively long periods.

    “Helping children become capable of and interested in developing ideas requires concerted effort from adults. And here the pandemic has, ironically, provided an opportunity.”

    For example, in the following exchange, a mother had just explained to her four-year-old daughter Laura that their pet bird had died. “He took his nest down and he knew he was dying and he got himself ready,” the mother said. At various points throughout the day, Laura said:
    “He knew he was dying?”
    “How did he know he was dying?”“I don’t want to die.”“I wonder what it feels like to be dead.”
    To sum up, although it is often invisible to adults, young children collect information about a wide variety of topics, and such knowledge lays the groundwork for future ideas. However, inquiry tells only part of the story.
    The role of invention
    Spend 15 minutes watching four-year-olds at play and you quickly notice that they don’t spend all their time investigating. Just as often, they are devising new objects out of various small items (e.g., string, silverware, blocks), planning imaginary scenarios, or mapping out the rules for new games. In other words, they are busy inventing. Just think of the child who fashions an airplane out of a small cardboard box, uses shoelaces to lock a sibling inside the bathroom as a prank, or lays bath towels over an upside-down chair to create a fort. All these actions are simple inventions. Meanwhile, children are engaging in other more intangible inventions — stories that recreate an upsetting experience, charts of made-up superheroes, and explanations of zero. These, too, involve new combinations of familiar elements to achieve a goal. But that is just the first stage of inventing.
    The road that leads from the earliest and simplest constructions to the more complex solutions of older children and adults is somewhat circuitous. Research has shown that very young children are stumped by some aspects of innovation. In one study, young children were invited to retrieve an attractive sticker from a small basket placed far down a narrow plastic tube. Offered various materials, including pipe cleaners, to reach the sticker, four-years-olds did not think to bend the pipe cleaner and use it as a hook. They could perform all the requisite actions, such as bending the pipe cleaner or selecting the correction solution when asked to choose from several options. But they could not seem to coordinate all the elements needed to solve the problem.
    Researchers describe this as a difficulty with ill-defined problems, a skill essential for more sophisticated thinking. Some new data suggest that young children are more adept than previously thought when solving problems that they find imaginatively compelling. In our lab, when children had to get a small character across some water to rescue another character, even four-year-olds readily used available materials to devise bridges, catapults, air balloons, and stilts.
    Meanwhile, just as children get better at orchestrating many elements of invention, they appear to lose a valuable asset. They become more rigid at using familiar objects in new ways, often stuck on whatever purpose they think an object was intended for. While the developmental picture of invention is complex, it points to one clear conclusion: When children invent, whether a fort, a story, or a new game, they use most of the tools required for more sophisticated problem solving; they use or combine familiar elements in new ways, thinking of different ways to achieve a goal, imagining future outcomes, and revising their plans.
    Understanding the idea of ideas
    During the early years, inquiry and invention develop separately. Before these concepts can be harnessed together to pursue more formal ideas and solve challenging problems, children need one more thing: the ability to treat one’s thoughts as an object — a mental representation that can be examined, revised, or reconsidered. We now have evidence that between the ages of five and six, children begin to understand the idea of ideas. When experimenters asked children to explain what an idea is, four-year-olds cast it in concrete terms: a plan of action or an object they made. For example:
    Child: “You could make anything you want, if you have one [an idea].”
    Experimenter: “So, what is your idea?”Child:  “To make a knot and it close.” [sic]
    But by the time children are six, most understand that an idea is a product of the mind and that there are many kinds of ideas. For example:
    Child: “Oh, an idea is something that you think!”Experimenter: “It’s something that you think?”
    Child: “It’s amazing, or it can be kind of scary.”
    The skills required to come up with illuminating explanations of puzzling phenomena and novel solutions to knotty problems are within reach of most children. But this capacity is not inevitable, nor is it simply the natural result of learning to spell, add, or write book reports. Helping children become capable of and interested in developing ideas requires concerted effort from adults. And here the pandemic has, ironically, provided an opportunity. Thrust into extended proximity with their children while they play, do school work, and even attend classes remotely, parents are in a good position to notice what and how children are thinking. When children gather information to answer their own questions (however unacademic or odd those questions may seem), mull over perplexing mysteries, speculate, outline probable or impossible outcomes, or consider alternative perspectives, they are practicing the skills essential to forming ideas. If parents and teachers learn to deliberately foster curiosity and invention, many more children than Gitanjali Rao will be on the path to innovation.
    Header photo: Jay Hsu. Creative Commons.  More

  • in

    Adolescent motherhood in crisis

    The COVID-19 pandemic has reignited concerns about the effects of crises on the development of children globally. Within this realm of concern is an area that continues to be overlooked: the particular vulnerability of adolescent mothers and mothers to be, and by proxy, their children. Countries with high rates of adolescent childbearing also tend to struggle with reaching education goals and reducing poverty. It’s not that adolescent motherhood is rare; in many parts of the world, marriage and childbearing under age 18 is very common. An estimated 12 million girls aged 15 to 19, and nearly 777,000 girls younger than 15, give birth each year – and most of their pregnancies are unintended. But the particular risks for this subdemographic often go overlooked because governments and the development community prefer to think about preventing adolescent pregnancies than supporting adolescent mothers. Our research addresses this gap, noting that, around the world, shocks like a global pandemic make adolescent mothers and their offspring exponentially more vulnerable.
    Adolescent mothers are already among some of the most vulnerable, even in the best of times and regardless of cultural perceptions (in some contexts, adolescent pregnancies are stigmatized; in others they are celebrated). Most teenage pregnancies occur in low- and middle-income countries and are often concentrated among the parts of society of the lowest incomes. Pregnancy at an early age often means mothers leave school and transition to domestic roles, resulting in lower levels of education, fewer economic resources, and less bargaining power in the home; these outcomes coincide with restricted access to sexual and reproductive health services. Adolescent childbearing is also associated with higher risks to maternal health. In fact, pregnancy and birth complications are the leading causes of death among 15- to 19-year-old girls worldwide.

    “Adolescent mothers are already among some of the most vulnerable, even in the best of times and regardless of cultural perceptions (in some contexts, adolescent pregnancies are stigmatized; in others they are celebrated).”

    However, not all of the risk is contextual. At least some of it lies “below the skin.” We argue in a forthcoming article that part of the risk adolescent mothers and their offspring face stems from neurobiological processes specific to adolescent development, for instance, heightened sensitivity to reward and stress. This becomes particularly salient when exploring how these processes interconnect with stressful life events. In short, adolescents’ heightened sensitivity to stressful events leads to higher levels of physiological stress, which has been demonstrated to affect adolescent development as well as pregnancy outcomes (e.g., preterm labor and low birthweight) and child development. Stress is transmitted to children prenatally through neuroendocrine pathways and postnatally through caregiving. In fact, recent studies link stress related to COVID-19 to pregnancy outcomes and early caregiving. Ultimately, we argue that the physiological stress response is a key factor in why adolescent moms and their offspring, on average, have worse developmental outcomes later in life, a fact that is supported by abundant evidence.
    Given the scale and urgency of the COVID-19 pandemic, we are asking questions about the impact of the pandemic on early child development broadly, and adolescent motherhood more specifically. We already know that large shocks, such as financial crises, pandemics, natural disasters, and armed conflict, are accompanied by massive social and institutional disruptions and cause substantial stress in individuals, families, and communities; we also know that these often lead to widespread displacement and insecurities in housing and livelihood. Higher rates of adolescent pregnancies have been observed in contexts of displacement, often due to inadequate availability of sexual and reproductive health and family planning services for adolescent girls. By mid-2020, more than 15 million people were newly displaced internally due to conflict or disaster. Their situations are made even more precarious by the fact that, in response to the pandemic, in many places, non-essential services and programs closed their doors or refocused to respond to the pandemic. Moreover, stigma associated with COVID-19 has drastically reduced clinic visits for prenatal care.
    Pregnant adolescents and adolescent mothers are even more at risk when sexual and reproductive health services become scarcer. In contexts of displacement, high rates of gender-based violence and poverty-driven transactional sex contribute to the increase in adolescent pregnancies. With lockdowns, there is the added risk of increased domestic violence and abuse in the home. For instance, both Kenya and Paraguay have reported increasing adolescent pregnancy rates during COVID-19 lockdowns. High rates of and increases in adolescent pregnancies during such stressful times should sound alarm bells.

    “High rates of and increases in adolescent pregnancies during such stressful times should sound alarm bells.”

    There is little evidence on how to best support adolescent mothers and mothers-to-be effectively, but some innovative interventions are pioneering the way. Countries such as Zimbabwe have started to change laws around school attendance for pregnant adolescent girls, allowing them to continue their education and ensuring that pregnant and mothering girls stay in school. A program in Ethiopia, “Meseret Hiwott,” used community women as mentors to facilitate group discussions for married adolescent mothers, focusing on increasing voluntary counselling and testing for HIV, as well as sexual and reproductive health awareness, family planning, motherhood, gender and power dynamics, and financial literacy. And a recent experimental evaluation of a home visiting program for low-income adolescent moms in São Paulo, Brazil, demonstrated positive effects on caregiving and maternal well-being. Such programs are promising, but more rigorous research is needed to better understand their impact and how to take them to scale successfully.
    Unfortunately, most efforts in this area have focused on preventing adolescent pregnancies. Many of these initiatives have largely failed to produce substantial change, and can contribute to stigmatization and drive underage marriage practices underground, increasing the risks to adolescent mothers and their offspring. They also fail to acknowledge that adolescent motherhood will not be going away in many parts of the world anytime soon. We need more investigation and inquiry into the most effective ways to support adolescent mothers and their children – particularly in contexts of acute stress. The effects of the current pandemic are likely to be felt for a while to come and new crises are inevitable. Understanding how crises affect adolescent girls and how to effectively support their development, education, and reproductive health, with or without children, will likely yield long-term returns, not just to them and their families, but to society at large and generations to come.
    Header photo: Fixers on Flickr. Creative Commons. More

  • in

    Chaos at home and infants’ play: Your baby may be more adaptable than you think

    Chaos in the home is bad for child development. Homes are chaotic if they are disorganized, unpredictable, and unstable. This could mean they are noisy, are crowded, have many people coming and going, or lack routines. The adverse effects of chaos at home on early cognitive and social-emotional development are well documented. Long-term exposure to chaos interferes with the development of important skills like self-regulation and cognition. But how can we interpret this research in a global pandemic? For many people, home life has become more chaotic since March. Daily routines have been disrupted and replaced. Busy parents are juggling work from home. And many parents are wondering: Should we be worried for our kids?
    How do young children respond to chaos in the home? Before the pandemic, we visited parents with infants (1-2 years old) while they played at home. With parents’ permission, we video recorded all the rooms in their house, getting an unprecedented look into their natural home settings. From the videos, we coded physical features of the homes that might reflect chaos, including the number of toys on the floor, items on the counters, unwashed dishes, piles of laundry, and scattered papers. We also analyzed infants’ play behaviors (e.g., the length of play and the objects selected for play) because play is an important way babies learn about their worlds. And the quality of infants’ play predicts cognitive and language skills. Based on research on chaos, we predicted that infants in highly cluttered, physically chaotic homes might experience disrupted play.
    Our preliminary findings surprised us: We found no evidence that any of the physical manifestations of chaos at home mattered for babies’ play. In fact, infants didn’t discriminate — they played with whatever objects were available to them, whether the objects were in bins or on the floor, and regardless of whether they were designed for play. They banged on pots and pans like a drum set, made a tower out of Tupperware, and played hide and seek in a pile of laundry. In other words, infants happily played and explored their environments, regardless of the state of their home.
    Any scientist or statistician will tell you that the absence of evidence is not the same as evidence in support of the counterhypothesis. In other words, we can’t conclude for sure that chaos at home doesn’t matter for infants’ play. Also, our study represents only physical manifestations of chaos. Children certainly need routines and structures to thrive. But when it comes to the state of your house? You can probably relax. And if your budget is tight lately, you can rest, knowing your baby is likely just as happy playing with Tupperware as with expensive gadgets. In coming studies, we plan to ask a different question. Rather than asking how chaos at home affects infants’ play, we want to know how infants learn to adapt to chaotic environments and play using whatever materials are available to them.
    The bottom line for parents is this: You’re probably doing a better job than you think. Your baby doesn’t care how organized your home is during the pandemic. Prolonged exposure to chaos is still not good for your child, but infants may be more resilient to mess than we previously thought. And their ability to adapt and even thrive amidst the chaos may actually surprise you.
    Header photo: Nenad Stojkovic. Creative Commons. More

  • in

    The evolved nest approach fosters children’s well-being

    New parents today often are given conflicting information about how to raise their children. This was not always the case. Millions of years ago, our species established childraising practices that shaped children to be cooperative and intelligent. These practices were passed from one generation to another through children’s observation and practice before they became parents. With civilization, industrialization, and other historical trends, these practices have diminished and sometimes have been replaced by practices that have outcomes opposite to the original ones.

    “Millions of years ago, our species established childraising practices that shaped children to be cooperative and intelligent. It is time to remember them.”

    We call these practices the evolved nest. What are those long-established practices?
    1. Soothing perinatal experiences where mothers are highly supported during pregnancy and follow natural biological rhythms during childbirth, and where neither mother nor child are traumatized during childbirth or separated afterward
    2. Several years of on-request breastfeeding and frequent suckling that shape not only the jaw and skull, but also the brain and body, with the thousands of ingredients in breast milk, including ingredients that protect babies from infectious agents
    Babies who aren’t breastfed have less brain myelination at three months (myelination is associated with intelligence) and biological consequences related to obesity, asthma, and allergies.
    3. Nearly constant affectionate touch in the first years and no negative touch to shape multiple systems like the stress response, the vagus nerve (which interrelates with all major body organs), and the oxytocin hormone system
    4. Responsive, companionable care from mother and others that reassures the baby, keeping him or her optimally aroused during rapid neuronal growth, and keeping the child feeling supported and connected throughout life
    5. A social climate that welcomes children at every stage, keeping them in the middle of community activities
    6. Self-directed free play with playmates of different ages that builds executive functions (e.g., redirecting actions and plans, empathy, and control of aggression) and leadership skills
    7. Immersion in nature and ecological attachment so children feel like members of the earth community with responsibilities to non-human members
    We know that each evolved nest practice shapes the neurobiological structures of children’s brains and bodies to work optimally, affecting everything about the child, including personality, sociality, and morality. In my lab, we study these components and their relation to well-being, self-control, sociality, and morality.
    Babies are so immature at birth, looking like fetuses of other animals, that to grow well they need nearly constant touch. In a recent article, parents who endorsed providing greater affectionate touch and less corporal punishment, than parents with the opposite pattern, reported that their preschool-aged children had less psychopathology and greater sociomoral capacities, like empathy and cooperation. In another study, of mothers from at-risk situations, children who received more positive touch and less negative touch over the first years of life had better self-regulation and cooperation than children who received less positive touch and more negative touch.
    In a recent study, colleagues and I asked parents in the China, Switzerland, and the United States to report on their preschool children’s evolved nest experience, specifically, experiences of affection, corporal punishment, indoor and outdoor self-directed free play, and family togetherness inside and outside the home. In every country, children whose parents practiced more evolved nesting in the prior week were more likely to be thriving socially and mentally.
    In a survey study of 383 mothers of three-year-olds in China, we collected information on children’s behavior and attitude as they related to components of the evolved nest. Mothers also completed standardized measures of their children’s behavior regulation, empathy, and conscience. We found significant effects for most caregiving practices and attitudes on children’s outcomes after controlling for maternal income and education, and most effects remained significant after controlling for responsive, companionable care.
    In another study (Narvaez, Wang & Cheng, 2016), adults reported on their childhood experiences, as well as their mental and social health. Childhood experience more consistent with the evolved nest predicted ethical orientations of social engagement via a pathway through secure attachment, mental health, and perspective taking. In addition, experiences that lacked components of the evolved nest through low levels of secure attachment and less optimal mental health predicted social opposition through low perspective taking and social withdrawal through personal distress.
    The evolved nest provides concrete ways for parents to be responsive to the needs of their children to foster optimal neurobiology, as well as psychological and social development.
    Header photo: Proggie. Creative Commons.  More

  • in

    Father involvement linked to better academic progress

    Researchers have found that greater involvement by fathers is linked with academic performance at school—a finding that held true among all socioeconomic groups. The link was small for measures like language and mathematics scores, but considerable in relation to reducing the extent to which children repeated grades at school. For example, one measure of father […] More

  • in

    Emotionally supportive parenting can help disadvantaged children stay on the rails

    Why do some children who are raised amid poverty, risk and danger emerge as more resilient than others in similar circumstances ? Why do some grow up relatively unscathed compared with their peers, whose later lives may be scarred by criminality, poor mental health, and repeated disadvantage? Having a calm, supportive parent when something goes […] More