Manuscript Details

Landry, S. H., Smith, K. E., Swank, P. R., Zucker, T., Crawford, A. D., & Solari, E. F. (2012). The effects of a responsive parenting intervention on parent-child interactions during shared book reading. Developmental Psychology, 48(4), 969–986.

High rating
Study reviewed under: Handbook of Procedures and Standards, Version 1
Author Affiliation

Susan Landry, a study author, is a developer of this model.

Funding Sources

Department of Health and Human Services, National Institutes of Health, Grant HD36099.

Study Design
Design Attrition Baseline equivalence Confounding factors Valid, reliable measures?
Randomized controlled trial Low

Established on race and socioeconomic status

None

Not assessed in manuscripts reviewed under Handbook of Procedures and Standards, Version 1

Findings that rate moderate or high in this manuscript

Positive parenting practices
Outcome measure Timing of follow-up Rating Direction of Effect Effect size (absolute value) Stastical significance Sample size Sample description
Responsiveness 3 months after program end High
Not statistically significant, p = 0.08 166 mother/child dyads PALS I*PALS II
Praise and encourage 3 months after program end High
Not statistically significant, p > 0.05 166 mother/child dyads PALS I*PALS II
Percent time only reading text 3 months after program end High
Not statistically significant, p = 0.26 166 mother/child dyads PALS I*PALS II
Language facilitation 3 months after program end High
Statistically significant, p = 0.03 166 mother/child dyads PALS I*PALS II
General verbal support 3 months after program end High
Not statistically significant, p = 0.89 166 mother/child dyads PALS I*PALS II
Open prompts 3 months after program end High
0.38 Statistically significant, p = 0.03 166 mother/child dyads PALS I*PALS II
Comments 3 months after program end High
Not statistically significant, p = 0.87 166 mother/child dyads PALS I*PALS II
Responsiveness 3 months after program end High
Not statistically significant, p = 0.22 166 mother/child dyads PALS II
Praise and encourage 3 months after program end High
Not statistically significant, p = 0.46 166 mother/child dyads PALS II
Percent time only reading text 3 months after program end High
Not statistically significant, p = 0.07 166 mother/child dyads PALS II
Language facilitation 3 months after program end High
Not statistically significant, p = 0.13 166 mother/child dyads PALS II
General verbal support 3 months after program end High
Not statistically significant, p = 0.96 166 mother/child dyads PALS II
Open prompts 3 months after program end High
Not statistically significant, p = 0.27 166 mother/child dyads PALS II
Comments 3 months after program end High
Not statistically significant, p = 0.98 166 mother/child dyads PALS II
Responsiveness 3 months after program end High
Not statistically significant, p = 0.35 166 mother/child dyads PALS I
Praise and encourage 3 months after program end High
Not statistically significant, p = 0.51 166 mother/child dyads PALS I
Percent time only reading text 3 months after program end High
Not statistically significant, p = 0.26 166 mother/child dyads PALS I
Language facilitation 3 months after program end High
Not statistically significant, p = 0.41 166 mother/child dyads PALS I
General verbal support 3 months after program end High
Not statistically significant, p = 0.59 166 mother/child dyads PALS I
Open prompts 3 months after program end High
Not statistically significant, p = 0.87 166 mother/child dyads PALS I
Comments 3 months after program end High
Not statistically significant, p = 0.51 166 mother/child dyads PALS I
Effect rating key
Favorable finding / Statistically significant
Unfavorable finding / Statistically significant
Ambiguous finding / Statistically significant
No effect / Not statistically significant
Child development and school readiness
Outcome measure Timing of follow-up Rating Direction of Effect Effect size (absolute value) Stastical significance Sample size Sample description
Behavioral responses 3 months after program end High
Not statistically significant, p = 0.88 166 mother/child dyads PALS I*PALS II
Verbal responses 3 months after program end High
Not statistically significant, p = 0.50 166 mother/child dyads PALS I*PALS II
Questions and requests 3 months after program end High
Not statistically significant, p = 0.38 166 mother/child dyads PALS I*PALS II
Comments 3 months after program end High
Not statistically significant, p = 0.42 166 mother/child dyads PALS I*PALS II
Coordination of gestures and verbalizations 3 months after program end High
Not statistically significant, p = 0.50 166 mother/child dyads PALS I*PALS II
Engagement in activity 3 months after program end High
Not statistically significant, p = .63 166 mother/child dyads PALS I*PALS II
Behavioral responses 3 months after program end High
Not statistically significant, p = 0.28 166 mother/child dyads PALS II
Verbal responses 3 months after program end High
0.30 Not statistically significant, p = 0.06 166 mother/child dyads PALS II
Questions and requests 3 months after program end High
0.16 Statistically significant, p = .01 166 mother/child dyads PALS II
Comments 3 months after program end High
Not statistically significant, p = 0.10 166 mother/child dyads PALS II
Coordination of gestures and verbalizations 3 months after program end High
Statistically significant, p < .01 166 mother/child dyads PALS II
Engagement in activity 3 months after program end High
Statistically significant, p = .04 166 mother/child dyads PALS II
Behavioral responses 3 months after program end High
Not statistically significant, p = 0.28 166 mother/child dyads PALS I
Verbal responses 3 months after program end High
Not statistically significant, p = 0.20 166 mother/child dyads PALS I
Questions and requests 3 months after program end High
Not statistically significant, p = 0.26 166 mother/child dyads PALS I
Comments 3 months after program end High
Not statistically significant, p = 0.97 166 mother/child dyads PALS I
Coordination of gestures and verbalizations 3 months after program end High
Not statistically significant, p = 0.95 166 mother/child dyads PALS I
Engagement in activity 3 months after program end High
Not statistically significant, p = 0.81 166 mother/child dyads PALS I
Effect rating key
Favorable finding / Statistically significant
Unfavorable finding / Statistically significant
Ambiguous finding / Statistically significant
No effect / Not statistically significant
Study Participants

The study included mother-infant pairs who had participated in an earlier study by Landry et al. (2006) in which they had been randomly assigned to PALS I (PALS Infant) or a Development Assessment of Skills (DAS) group. For the current study, they were randomly assigned to one of two intervention groups: PALS II (PALS Toddler/Preschooler) or another DAS comparison group, stratified by whether they had initially received PALS I or DAS. Thus, some received PALS I only, some received PALS II only, some received both PALS I and II, and the remaining pairs received DAS home visits only. According to information provided by the first author, initially 169 mother-infant pairs were randomly assigned, 85 to the treatment groups and 84 to the comparison group. After attrition, 166 mother-infant pairs (84 PALS and 82 DAS) remained in the study. Approximately one-third of each group was African American, Hispanic, or Caucasian. Most were poor and unmarried. Mothers were all 18 years old or older at intake into the original study and averaged approximately 30 years old. On average, mothers had 12 or more years of education in both groups. Participants were followed over the course of 11 visits.

Setting

The study was conducted in the Houston-Galveston (Texas) area.

Home Visiting Services

PALS II was adapted from the PALS I curriculum to target similar responsive behaviors for toddlers plus an additional session targeting behavioral guidance. PALS II consists of a series of 11 home visits, each lasting 1.5 hours and occurring approximately weekly. The home visits are guided by a curriculum that included (1) asking mothers to review their experiences across the past week related to their efforts to try targeted behaviors, (2) describing the current visit’s targeted behavior, (3) watching and discussing with mothers the educational videotape of mothers from similar backgrounds, (4) videotaping mothers interacting with their infants in situations that the mothers selected with coaching, (5) supporting mothers to critique their behaviors and the infants’ responses during the videotaped practice, and (6) planning with mothers how to integrate responsive behaviors into their everyday activities with laminated cards. The facilitator coached the mothers to use the targeted behaviors, including commenting on the infants’ responses when the behaviors were used. Sessions were available in both English and Spanish.

Comparison Conditions

Comparison group members received the same number of home visits from facilitators, which included discussions about new infant skills during the previous week and infant development and assessment. Facilitators provided mothers with answers to and handouts about their questions on infant skill development.

Were any subgroups examined?
No
Subgroups examined

• Early term or full-term birth (yes or no)