Search

Background: Psychological models of posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) and prolonged grief disorder (PGD) make predictions about the role of unhelpful coping strategies in maintaining difficulties by blocking self-correction of negative appraisals and memory integration following stressful life events like bereavement. However, few studies have tested these predictions directly. Method: We used counterfactually based causal mediation to assess whether unhelpful coping strategies mediated the relationship between (1) loss-related memory characteristics and/or (2) negative grief-related appraisals and symptoms of PGD, PTSD and depression using a three-wave longitudinal sample (N = 275). Appraisals and memory characteristics were measured at time point 1, unhelpful coping strategies at T2, and symptom variables at T3. Additionally, multiple mediation analyses within a structural equation modelling (SEM) framework assessed which types of coping strategies differentially mediated symptoms of PGD, PTSD and depression. Results: Coping strategies mediated the relationship between negative appraisals and memory characteristics and symptoms of PGD, PTSD and depression after adjusting for demographics and loss characteristics. Sensitivity analyses suggested that these results were most robust for PGD, followed by PTSD and then depression. Multiple mediation analyses suggested that all four subscales (avoidance, proximity seeking, loss rumination and injustice rumination) individually mediated the effect of memory characteristics and appraisals on PGD. Conclusions: These results suggest that core predictions of the cognitive model for PTSD and the cognitive behavioural model of PGD are useful in predicting symptoms of post-loss mental health problems in the first 12–18 months after loss. Targeting unhelpful coping strategies is likely to reduce symptoms of PGD, PTSD and depression. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

We asked whether parental questionnaires on the heritage language proficiency of bilingual children might elucidate how proficient bilingual children are in their heritage language. We tested 20 UK-based Polish–English bilingual children between 4;5 and 5;9 years on Polish and English versions of the Cross-linguistic Lexical Tasks (CLTs). These comprise receptive and expressive picture tasks. Our bilingual group performed significantly worse on the Polish CLTs than on the English CLTs overall. They also performed significantly worse on the English CLTs than did an age- and gender-matched group of monolingual English-speaking children. Therefore our bilingual sample represent the type of bilinguals for whom education professionals have difficulty determining whether weak English is due to diminished English input vs. an underlying speech, language or communication need.Parents of the bilinguals completed a Polish adaptation of the Children’s Communication Checklist 2. They also completed the Parents of Bilingual Children Questionnaire (PaBiQ), which includes risk factor measures (‘No Risk Index’ and children’s ‘Current Language Skills’). The PaBiQ also includes measures of the Amount and Length of Exposure to the majority language (English) prior to age four as well as the Proportion of English in the current input. For the bilingual sample the CCC2 General Communication Composite (GCC), which measures structural language, significantly predicted Polish CLT production, uniquely accounting for 25% of the variance. The parent-rated PaBiQ ‘Current Polish Skills’ section predicted the Polish CLT comprehension. While the PaBiQ measure of Amount and Length of English Exposure was related to both Polish comprehension and production, it did not retain significance in a regression analysis. Therefore, parental questionnaires of the heritage language could provide a useful first step for education professionals when deciding whether to refer bilingual children for speech and language assessment. Large scale studies are needed to further develop these parental questionnaires.   [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background Bilingual children are under-referred due to an ostensible expectation that they lag behind their monolingual peers in their English acquisition. The recommendations of the Royal College of Speech and Language Therapists (RCSLT) state that bilingual children should be assessed in both the languages known by the children. However, despite these recommendations, a majority of speech and language professionals report that they assess bilingual children only in English as bilingual children come from a wide array of language backgrounds and standardized language measures are not available for the majority of these. Moreover, even when such measures do exist, they are not tailored for bilingual children. Aims It was asked whether a cut-off exists in the proportion of exposure to English at which one should expect a bilingual toddler to perform as well as a monolingual on a test standardized for monolingual English-speaking children. Methods & Procedures Thirty-five bilingual 2;6-year-olds exposed to British English plus an additional language and 36 British monolingual toddlers were assessed on the auditory component of the Preschool Language Scale, British Picture Vocabulary Scale and an object-naming measure. All parents completed the Oxford Communicative Development Inventory (Oxford CDI) and an exposure questionnaire that assessed the proportion of English in the language input. Where the CDI existed in the bilingual's additional language, these data were also collected. Outcomes & Results Hierarchical regression analyses found the proportion of exposure to English to be the main predictor of the performance of bilingual toddlers. Bilingual toddlers who received 60% exposure to English or more performed like their monolingual peers on all measures. K-means cluster analyses and Levene variance tests confirmed the estimated English exposure cut-off at 60% for all language measures. Finally, for one additional language for which we had multiple participants, additional language CDI production scores were significantly inversely related to the amount of exposure to English. Conclusions & Implications Typically developing 2;6-year-olds who are bilingual in English and an additional language and who hear English 60% of the time or more, perform equivalently to their typically developing monolingual peers. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]