1. Care giving influences on preschoolers’ executive function: Focus on an at-risk sample Tracey Fay PhD candidate and Pamela Meredith PhD

2. Who we are We are Australia’s first charity We are an independent, non-religious organisation established in 1813 We have been a catalyst for social change for 200 years, tackling some of Australia’s most difficult issues – eg. Lobbying to abolish child labour and campaigning for the introduction of the old age pension Through our work we help people to change their lives Through our advocacy work we influence policy to fight for a fairer Australia

3. Outline 1.What is executive function? 2.Background to study 3.Literature Review 4.Initial findings 5.Recommendations 3

4. 4 Preschoolers difficulties: cognitive or behavioural in origin? Young children who experience multiple economic and social adversities have been shown to enter preschool with higher rates of social and emotional difficulties, disruptive behaviours, learning problems, and impairments in executive function (EF) and self-regulation (Cicchetti et al 2004)

5. 5 A clinical dilemma Difficulty performing tasks which entailed: High level of novelty Focused attention Timely response Continuously changing conditions Inhibiting motor actions

6. 6 What is executive function? The ability to regulate attention, inhibit inappropriate responses, coordinate information in memory, organise and sequence behaviour, is necessary for purposeful, future-orientated behaviour (Diamond, 2007) –Inhibitory control –Working memory –Cognitive flexibility

7. 7 Examples of tasks requiring executive function blue green red yellow black 7

8. 8 Executive function predicts outcomes Maths achievement School readiness Social competence Behaviour problems Adult functioning 8

9. Prefrontal cortex (PFC) and environmental stress ) deep connections with limbic brain protracted period of growth high density of neuro-chemical receptors/projections The prefrontal cortex is highly susceptible to early environmental stress

10. Aim of the study & potential benefits Aim: Examine the extent to which individual differences in preschoolers’ executive function is linked to the quality of the childrearing environment Identifying social correlates of early EF can guide family centered interventions (Bryck & Fisher, 2012) Targeting early EF can impact problem behaviours (Bierman et al., 2008) Contributes knowledge for informing efforts to maximize cognitive potential and mental health of at-risk young children (Gould et al., 2012) )

11. Gaps in the Literature ) Child executive function has been linked to early life stress, only in extreme samples (e.g. De Bellis et al. 2009). Studies into care - giving influences of child EF based on middle-class, healthy samples. Biological (neuroscience) studies outnumber social & psychological studies on EF (Hughes & Ensor) Limited literature on child EF in field of intervention science (Bryck & Fisher, 2012)

12. Factors that impede EF development ) Early life stress Poor language ability Lack of cognitive stimulation Problematic parent-child attachment

13. Parental employment (SES) is linked to child outcome 2 epidemiological hypotheses Child language effects on achievement & self- regulation Limited resources Lack of opportunities Enrichment Increased exposure to early life stress  physiological stress Parental coping strategies Parent-child relationship Parenting quality Exposure to stress & adversity Shonkoff, Boyce & Mc Ewen, 2009. JAMA 301,2252- 2259 Cognitive and social – emotional competence

14. 14 Factors that promote EF development High SES Quality parenting: sensitivity, mind-mindedness, and autonomy-support. Parental scaffolding Preschool programs that focus on social-emotional skills Mother-child attachment security

15. 15 Developmental Systems Model of Early Intervention (adapted from Guralnick, 2011)

16. 16 Hypotheses Family interactions More positive parenting, less life stress will be associated with higher executive function. Family Resources Higher SES, adequate mental health, and secure adult attachment will be associated with higher executive function..

17. 17 Overall group N=52 Child/parent inclusion criteria: Child 4-5 years of age Absence of child brain injury, developmental disorder, or prematurity. Child/parent English competency Study sample

18. 18 At-risk group PARENTCHILD + Lack of parenting skills Substance abuse Difficult child behaviourLack of family/social supports Domestic violence Parental Mental health Parental learning disability

19. Parent measures 1.Depression, Anxiety & Stress Scale (DASS-21) 2.Coping with Child Negative Emotions Scales (CCNES) 3.Relationship Questionnaire (RQ) 4.Child Life Events 5.Socio-demographic checklist

20. Child measures 1.Behaviour Rating Inventory of Executive Function, Preschool Version (BRIEF - P)

21. 21 2. Happy Sad Task (EF) 21

22. 22 3. Card Sorting Test (EF) 22

23. 23 4. Peabody Picture Vocabulary Test 23

24. 24 Demographic Details N=52 Parents –90% were mothers (respondents) –64% two parent family, 29% single –58% women had tertiary education –77% had at least one parent working –22% received Centrelink benefits –52% CALD mothers –58% CALD fathers –44% had two children Children –29% children spoke another language –64% boys –64% were 5 yrs –34% girls

25. 25 Descriptive information At-risk group –19% secure adult attachment, 4% fearful –57% reported >4 child negative life events –23% reported severe to extremely severe depression (DASS) Community group –58% secure adult attachment, 46% fearful –26.8 had >4 child negative life events –0% reported severe to extremely severe depression (DASS)

26. 26 Initial Findings Significantly different EF scores (parent report & standardized) between community & at-risk group. Parental depression is correlated with both parent report & standardized EF tests. Significantly different EF scores (standardized only) between secure and insecure adult attachment. Life events correlated with parent report but not standardized EF tests.

27. 27 Strengths & limitations of study Diverse SES At-risk group Use of parental reports Cross-sectional design Multiple measures of EF (parent report and objective measures)  Small sample size (so far) No direct measure of parent- child interactions Not matched control group Single EF tests, not complete battery BRIEF- P is broad indicator only Child life events measure

28. Translating findings for practice Results highlight potential benefits of programs that: decrease negative life events support parents mental health & emotional state address parents’ attachment needs dual focus on child & adult needs

29. Thank you www.bensoc.org.au traceyf@bensoc.org.au