Manuscript Detail

View Revisions

Madden, J., O’Hara, J., & Levenstein, P. (1984). Home again: Effects of the Mother-Child Home Program on mother and child. Child Development, 55(2), 636–647.

Model(s) Reviewed: ParentChild® Core Model
Additional sources:

WWHV027878

Levenstein, P., O'Hara, J., & Madden, J. (1983). The mother-child home program of the verbal interaction project. In Consortium for Longitudinal Studies (Ed.), As the twig is bent-lasting effects of preschool programs. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates
Manuscript screening details
Screening decision Screening conclusion HomVEE procedures and standards version
Passes screens Eligible for review Version 1
Study design details
Rating Design Attrition Baseline equivalence Compromised randomization Confounding factors Valid, reliable measure(s)
High Randomized controlled trial Low Not applicable None None Not assessed in manuscripts reviewed before 2021
Notes:

footnote126

Submitted by user on

The study had low attrition for four outcomes: 1960 Stanford Binet (1973 – 1976 cohorts), PPVT (1973 – 1975 cohorts), PPVT (1973 – 1974 cohorts), and maternal interactive behavior (1974 – 1976 cohorts).

Study characteristics
Study participants The study included four cohorts of families from 1973 to 1976. To be eligible for the study, the families had to qualify for low-income housing; live in rented housing; and have children 21 to 33 months at the beginning of the program, who could be tested in English. In addition, neither resident parent could have more than a 12th grade education or be in an occupation categorized as higher than “semiskilled.” Across all cohorts, 221 families were randomly assigned. The post-program follow-up included 166 families (86 in the treatment group and 80 in the comparison group). Eighty-eight percent of the sample was African American.
Setting Four suburban areas of New York City.
Intervention services The program (called the Mother Child Home Program) included 46 home visits each school year (10 month period) for two years. Home visitors, called Toy Demonstrators, met with the family twice a week for half hour sessions. For the first weekly visit, she brought a toy or book and modeled verbal interaction focusing on the toy or book. She also encouraged the mother to participate. The second home visit was a review session on the same toy or book.
Comparison conditions The comparison condition differed across cohorts. In 1973, the comparison families only participated in the testing. In 1974 and 1975, the comparison families were given toys and books, but did not receive home visits. In 1976, all families were recruited through an Early Screening Program, which included an IQ pretest. Families assigned to the comparison condition were invited to continue in the Early Screening Program, which was not described, but were not told about the treatment program.
Subgroups examined This field lists subgroups examined in the manuscript (even if they were not replicated in other samples and not reported on the summary page for this model’s report).
Subgroups are not listed for manuscripts reviewed before 2021.
Funding sources Carnegie Corporation of New York, Education Commission of the States, National Institute of Mental Health, and Surdna Foundation.
Author affiliation Unknown
Peer reviewed Peer reviewed status is not listed for manuscripts reviewed before 2021.

Findings that rate moderate or high

Child development and school readiness
Rating Outcome measure Effect Sample Timing of follow-up Sample size Intervention group Comparison group Group difference Effect size Statistical significance Notes
High PPVT
FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect
1973 – 1974 cohorts Post-program 82 children Mean = 89.48 Mean = 90.36 MD = -0.88 HomVEE calculated = -0.06 Not statistically significant, p ≥ 0.05
High PPVT
FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect
1973 – 1975 cohorts Post-program 111 children Mean = 91.60 Mean = 91.28 Mean difference = 0.32 HomVEE calculated = 0.05 Not statistically significant, p ≥ 0.05
High Stanford-Binet
FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect
1973 – 1976 cohorts Post-program 166 children Mean = 104.05 Mean = 103.54 Mean difference = 0.51 HomVEE calculated = 0.04 Not statistically significant, p ≥ 0.05
Positive parenting practices
Rating Outcome measure Effect Sample Timing of follow-up Sample size Intervention group Comparison group Group difference Effect size Statistical significance Notes
High Maternal Interactive Behavior
FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect
1973 – 1976 cohorts Post-program 114 mothers Mean = 282.38 Mean = 185.95 Mean difference = 96.43 HomVEE calculated = 0.96 Statistically significant, p < 0.05