It isn’t news. It confirms research done at the University
of Kansas and dutifully reported on this blog.
New studies from Ireland confirm that word count matters.
The number of words a parent addresses to a baby influences brain development. The
rule is: the more the better. Previous research has shown that this only
pertains to conversation. A chattering television set does not produce the same
effect.
Early research distinguished among different social classes. The higher the social class the more words parents spoke to their babies. Margaret Talbot wrote in The New Yorker:
In the nineteen-eighties, two child
psychologists at the University of Kansas, Betty Hart and Todd Risley, began
comparing, in detail, how parents of different social classes talked with their
children. Hart and Risley had both worked in preschool programs designed to
boost the language skills of low-income kids, but they had been dissatisfied
with the results of such efforts: the achievement gap between rich and poor had
continued to widen. They decided to look beyond the classroom and examine what
went on inside the home. Hart and Risley recruited forty-two families: thirteen
upper, or “professional,” class, ten middle class, thirteen working class, and
six on welfare. Each family had a baby who was between seven and twelve months
old. During the next two and a half years, observers visited each home for an
hour every month, and taped the encounters. They were like dinner guests who
never said much but kept coming back.
In all, Hart and Risley reported, they analyzed
“more than 1,300 hours of casual interactions between parents and their
language-learning children.” The researchers noticed many similarities among
the families: “They all disciplined their children and taught them good manners
and how to dress and toilet themselves.” They all showed their children
affection and said things like “Don’t jump on the couch” and “Use your spoon”
and “Do you have to go potty?” But the researchers also found that the
wealthier parents consistently talked more with their kids. Among the
professional families, the average number of words that children heard in an
hour was twenty-one hundred and fifty; among the working-class families, it was
twelve hundred and fifty; among the welfare families, it was six hundred and
twenty. Over time, these daily differences had major consequences, Hart and
Risley concluded: “With few exceptions, the more parents talked to their
children, the faster the children’s vocabularies were growing and the higher
the children’s I.Q. test scores at age 3 and later.”
Of course, it matters which words are chosen. A larger
vocabulary and more complex sentence construction are better than a more
limited vocabulary. One suspects that wealthier parents also possess more
mental aptitude and that this might have something to do with brain structure.
Anyway, a researcher in Ireland has recently confirmed the earlier
results. Melissa Dahl reports:
Parents
of tiny babies: When you’re home with the kid, keep a one-sided conversation
going about anything and everything while you’re folding laundry, making
dinner, or doing whatever else around the house. A steady stream of idle
chatter from mom or dad’s mouth improves the child’s cognitive development,
even more so than reading to them does, according to the results of a study
recently published in
the journal Language Teaching and Therapy.
Aisling
Murray, of the Economic and Social Research Institute in Ireland, initially set
out to investigate the importance of reading, and whether reading to infants
was associated with higher scores on indicators of cognitive development than
other language-based interactions between parent and infant, like talking. She
expected that reading would win out; the question, really, was how much better
reading was for language skills.
Murray
used data from the Growing Up in Ireland study, which included a sample of
7,845 infants. Parents were asked how often they read or spoke to their
9-month-old infants, and Murray and her team found that parents who said they
“always” talked to their baby while doing things around the house tended to
have babies who scored higher on a test designed to measure babies’ burgeoning
problem-solving and communication skills; reading to the baby regularly, in
comparison, was also associated with an increase in problem-solving and
communication skills, though not to the same degree.
I feel obliged to point out the obvious. I have to do it because no one seems capable of drawing a distinction between mothers and
fathers. Everyone seems to be using the more gender neutral term “parents.”
And yet, we all know that women are far better at idle chatter than men are. A chatty and garrulous
mother will be better at idle chatter than would a man who is the
strong, silent type.
One suspects that women are naturally chatty because they
possess a maternal instinct. While it is true that men can perform many of the
tasks that constitute bringing up a child, it makes sense to say that women are
naturally better at all of them. The chattiness factor is one that can be
quantified, thus, that interests researchers.
This does not necessarily mean that a mother should stay
home from work in order to care for her children. It does suggest that if her
husband chooses to become Mr. Mom in her place, children will be hearing far
fewer words. And that this will influence brain development. It also suggests
that when a working mother chooses someone to care for her children she ought to
choose a woman who has highly developed language skills and who is especially
chatty.
Finally, while this research does not directly relate to
what Nazi philosopher Martin Heidegger called “idle chatter,” we should at least
notice that Dahl is quote correct to use the term to describe a mother’s
conversations with her baby. Rather than follow the philosopher in denouncing
idle chatter as meaningless and superficial, we should notice that in some
circumstances it serves an important purpose.
Stuart: One suspects that women are naturally chatty because they possess a maternal instinct. While it is true that men can perform many of the tasks that constitute bringing up a child, it makes sense to say that women are naturally better at all of them. The chattiness factor is one that can be quantified, thus, that interests researchers.
ReplyDeleteAgreed - women are surely more "naturally skilled" at talking to/with infants and toddlers, even if this "instinct" is teachable so fathers or men (or quiet introverted mothers or women) can do better when they know that this skill is important and why.
There probably are "tricks" to learn to avoid boredom, and in part explaining activities while they're being done gives a context.
And context obviously matters - watching TV or videos can't clearly substitute, while some might assume that - researchers should also dismiss that "fix".
Its also a good reason to suggest single-child households are inferior. Someone has to be first born, but siblings surely help in language and social skills.