Search

Community agencies and practitioners around the globe seek opportunities to learn various assessment tools and interventions rooted in attachment theory. However, information regarding the feasibility of implementation and sustainability of these tools once participants have been trained to use them, is limited. This study investigated the perceived acceptability, feasibility, utility, relevance, fidelity, and sustainability of the Atypical Maternal Behavior Instrument for Assessment and Classification‐Brief (AMBIANCE‐Brief) among practitioners who had taken a training. Practitioners (N = 59) who attended a virtual AMBIANCE‐Brief training originating from Canada between June 2020 and November 2021 completed an online follow‐up survey. Practitioners reported that they primarily used the AMBIANCE‐Brief for case conceptualization (68%). Additionally, 95% agreed that the AMBIANCE‐Brief was relevant to their clinical practice, 98% agreed it was useful for their clinical work, 76% agreed that it was feasible to implement into their clinical work, and 59% found it easy to incorporate into their treatment planning with clients. Findings suggest that the AMBIANCE‐Brief may be acceptable, feasible, and useful for practitioners. Avenues for continuing to evaluate the AMBIANCE‐Brief include cross‐cultural validity, coder drift, and booster sessions. Additional work clarifying how practitioners integrate the measure into practice would be valuable. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Meta‐analytic associations between observed parental sensitivity and child behavioral problems were examined (children aged 0–17 years). Studies (k = 108, N = 28,114) contained sociodemographically diverse samples, primarily from North America and Europe, reporting on parent‐child dyads (95% mothers; 54% boys). Sensitivity significantly related to internalizing (k = 69 studies; N = 14,729; r = −.08, 95% CI [−.12, −.05]) and externalizing (k = 94; N = 25,418; r = −.14, 95% CI [−.17, −.11]) problems, with stronger associations found for externalizing. For internalizing problems, associations were significantly stronger among samples with low socioeconomic status (SES) versus mid‐high SES, in peer‐reviewed versus unpublished dissertations, and in studies using composite versus single scale sensitivity measures. No other moderators emerged as significant. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Parents have experienced considerable challenges and stress during the COVID‐19 pandemic, which may impact their well‐being. This meta‐analysis sought to identify: (1) the prevalence of depression and anxiety in parents of young children (

Background: While it has been purported that excessive screen time can lead to behavioral problems, it has also been suggested that children with behavioral dysregulation receive more access to screens to manage problematic behavior. In this study, both temporally stable and longitudinal associations between screen time and externalizing and internalizing behaviors across childhood are examined to directly address this issue of directionality. Methods: Data are from a prospective cohort of 10,172 Irish children, collected between 2010 and 2018 when children were ages 3, 5, 7, and 9. Children's screen time (hours/day) and externalizing and internalizing behaviors (Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire) were assessed via caregiver report. Random‐intercepts cross‐lagged panel models were used to estimate longitudinal bidirectional associations while controlling for temporally stable (i.e., 'time‐invariant' or 'trait‐like') differences between children. Results: Temporally stable differences between children were observed for both screen time and behavior problems. Longitudinal trajectories for screen time lacked stability; however, and externalizing and internalizing behaviors stabilized increasingly during later childhood. Greater externalizing and internalizing behaviors at age 3 were directionally associated with increased screen time at age 5. Greater screen time at ages 3 and 5 was directionally associated with increased internalizing behaviors at ages 5 and 7, respectively. More screen time at age 7 was directionally associated with fewer internalizing behaviors at age 9. Screen time was not associated with later externalizing behaviors. Conclusions: Bidirectional associations between screen time and internalizing behaviors were observed for preschoolers. Directional associations between screen time and internalizing difficulties were observed across childhood. These findings can inform screen use guidelines and family media planning at different ages and stages of development. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The Atypical Maternal Behavior Instrument for Assessment and Classification—Brief (AMBIANCE‐Brief) was developed to provide a clinically useful and psychometrically sound assessment of disrupted parenting behavior for community practitioners. With prior evidence of this tool's reliability and validity in laboratory settings, this study aimed to determine whether providers from family service agencies could become reliable in the use of the level of disrupted communication following a brief training. Providers (N = 46) from three agency sites participated in a 2‐day AMBIANCE‐Brief training and, at the end of the training, coded eight videotaped mother–child interactions. Novice participant coding was compared to expert consensus ratings using intraclass correlations. On average, participants' interrater agreement was good (ICCmean =.84, SD = 0.10), with 89% meeting the reliability standards of ICC ≥.70. In response to queries, 100% of participants indicated that they would recommend the AMBIANCE‐Brief training to their colleagues, 85% reported that the AMBIANCE‐Brief measure would be useful or very useful for their clinical practice, and 56% of participant clinicians believed that parents would find the measure acceptable or very acceptable for integration into intervention or support planning. Altogether, these findings speak to the feasibility of using the AMBIANCE‐Brief in community settings. Future studies are needed in diverse clinical and community contexts to evaluate whether use of this assessment tool can inform more targeted interventions tailored to the specific needs of families. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Resulting from a community‐identified need for a well‐validated indicator of caregiving difficulties for use in practice settings, a brief form of the Atypical Maternal Behavior Instrument for Assessment and Classification System (AMBIANCE) was developed for use as a screening instrument. Prior to its dissemination, this study aimed to assess the feasibility, reliability, and validity of the AMBIANCE‐Brief. Adolescent mother–infant dyads (N = 69) participated in the Strange Situation Procedure, as well as play sessions with and without toys. Maternal disrupted caregiving was coded from the play sessions using the AMBIANCE and AMBIANCE‐Brief. The AMBIANCE‐Brief demonstrated convergent validity with the AMBIANCE in the play session with toys (r =.65, p <.001) and without toys (r =.61, p <.001). Concurrent validity of the AMBIANCE‐Brief was also demonstrated in relation to infant attachment disorganization in the play session with toys (r =.36, p <.05) and without toys (r =.32, p <.01). These findings suggest a shorter protocol for assessing disrupted caregiving may be feasible and valid for use in community settings. Future studies are in progress to train community practitioners in the use of the AMBIANCE‐Brief and to evaluate their reliability. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The displacement hypothesis1 states that screen media use I displaces i learning opportunities for children to practise developmental skills (eg, talking, walking, drawing), as well as caregiver interactions and other enriching offline activities (eg, reading), which in turn leads to delays in developmental skill acquisition. Mean reading and parent-child interaction scores were 3.92 (SD = 0.29) and 21.77 (SD = 2.07) at 24 months and 2.60 (SD = 0.93) and 22.32 (SD = 1.80) at 36 months, respectively. A linear regression revealed that higher levels of screen use at 24-months of age were significantly associated with lower levels of reading at 36 months of age ( I i , -0.10; 95% CI: -0.16, -0.05). [Extracted from the article]