New research links talking to babies with their IQ and verbal abilities 10 years later

By: Steve Hannon, president, LENA

LENA president Steve Hannon
LENA president Steve Hannon

We’re excited to share the results of a newly-published longitudinal study that researchers here at LENA have been working on for more than 10 years. The findings confirm that the amount of talk with adults that babies experience in the first three years of life is related to their verbal abilities and IQ in adolescence. Two-way conversations in the 18- to 24-month age range may be particularly important.

The paper, “Language Experience in the Second Year of Life and Language Outcomes in Late Childhood,” was published in the October 2018 edition of Pediatrics. Its conclusions affirm exactly the kind of work Reach Out and Read (ROR) is doing to educate families about the importance of early interaction and providing them with the tools to build early literacy.

“By showing that parent-child verbal interactions in early childhood predict critically important outcomes through age 14 years (∼10 years later), the authors of this study have made a major contribution to this topic, with strong implications for American Academy of Pediatrics policy and clinical practice recommendations,” Drs. Perri Klass, ROR’s medical director, and Dr. Alan L. Mendelsohn, ROR’s principal investigator, wrote in commentary for Pediatrics.

LENA photo of mom and baby and young boy in school

While it may seem intuitive that adults should talk with children, many people don’t realize just how important conversations actually are.   

For example, two other studies this year from Harvard University and Massachusetts Institute of Technology have shown that the amount of conversation children experience is related to changes in their brain structure and function. Additionally, other studies have indicated that language exposure is related to children’s brain processing speed, subsequent vocabulary acquisition and success transitioning to kindergarten.

Research also tells us that adults who talk with children the least tend to overestimate the most. That’s why LENA technology, which provides objective feedback, is a helpful tool. In the same way a pedometer provides objective feedback on how many steps you take each day, LENA helps caregivers get an accurate understanding of children’s language environments and identifies specific areas for growth.

To truly improve outcomes for children and make progress toward closing opportunity gaps, we must capitalize on the power of conversation to build babies’ brains.

If you’re interested in learning more about this important research, sign up to view a discussion with the lead researchers moderated by policy expert Shannon Rudisill. Click here for more information and to register.

Papers, pixels and pediatrics

This article was originally published by the Cap Times on Nov. 6, 2017

Recently, a colleague asked me about whether there was a difference between reading a book on a screen versus a paper page. People do worry about all sorts of concerns — light from screens, fine motor skill development, reading comprehension, and more. Many of these stem from an underlying technophobia — or technophilia, as it may be. What does the research tell us?

There are published studies which formally examine the difference, and the results seem to be all over the place. Some suffer from small sample sizes, or look only at very specific domains — comprehension, or interactional parent/child “warmth”, or mastery of a specific skill. There’s also a big difference looking at toddlers versus preschoolers versus elementary schoolchildren; they are at very different places in the world of reading. Additionally, many are adult studies, and may not apply to children. The reality is that, based on the available research, we just don’t yet know if there are significant meaningful differences.

I’m asked this question frequently when I give talks about early literacy, and I try to give at least some amount of guidance. My answer is as follows: To a certain extent, I think that text is text, whether it’s being viewed as ink on the dried wood pulp that we call pages or glowing pixels on a screen. There are a few key caveats, though:

First, the research is mixed on whether use of backlit screens can impact sleep. Melatonin is a hormone involved in initiation of sleep, and it is affected by light exposure, particularly certain wavelengths. While television has been in our collective lives for decades, those screens are a few feet away, rather than the several inches of most portable devices. However, while studies of close-in light use may affect melatonin, does typical real-world use do so? It’s hard to know as of yet. Until there’s better clarity on this, avoiding glowing screens at least an hour before bedtime is reasonable.

Second, most books for young children involve skillfully created images. Ensuring a screen is high-quality enough to allow the beauty of the images to be displayed is important and shouldn’t be compromised. Illustrations are as much part of the story as the text.

Third, there is a danger of a slippery slope when it comes to electronic devices — even young children often know devices can not only provide a Caldecott-award-winning picture book, but also offer up games. It’s hard for parents to resist a young child’s demands for the attention-grabbing nature of games — after all, marketing cereals to children is predicated on them throwing tantrums in the supermarket for a particular kind — with a high risk of displacing the intention to share books together…night after night.

Finally, there’s the danger of thinking the enhancements offered by e-books are necessarily an improvement over physical books. A parent might assume having a cow moo when tapped on a screen is inherently better than the silent paper equivalent. But is it? If that moo is not essential to the narrative or structure of the book, it may simply be a distractor. Children who become attuned to the “tap-and-make-something-happen” dynamic may ignore much of what is on displayed pages in favor of tapping everything on the screen in an attempt to “make it go”.

Ultimately, it all comes down to how the book is used. Assuming due care is exercised with the above points, for young children the most important factor is the presence of a caring, nurturing, responsive adult who understands how to interactively explore a book with a young child. This may be a skill unconsciously picked up by the adult through environmental role models, but for some they may require modeling, coaching, and the encouragement to do so. Rather than become lost in the electronic versus paper book wars, we would do well to ensure that each and every child has an adult in their lives who knows how to read well with them and can do so routinely.

Dipesh Navsaria, MPH, MSLIS, MD is the medical director of Reach Out and Read Wisconsin. He shares research regarding kids reading physical books and on electronic device.
Dipesh Navsaria, MPH, MSLIS, MD is the medical director of Reach Out and Read Wisconsin