Li et al (2013) Flashcards
What was the general aim?
To investigate the effects of high and low quality day care in two age groups: infant toddler and pre school
What did Li et al look at?
How cognitive, language and pre academic skills were impacted and the different combinations of high and low quality daycare at different ages
What was hypothesis 1?
> HQ early care would improve cognition
>But, HQ early care would be irrelevent without HQ late care, people with low-low would be the same
What was hypothesis 2?
> HQ late care would improve cog, lang and pre academics
>High-High care would lead to better cog, lang and PA than Low-High
What was hypothesis 3?
High-High would be associated with higher outcomes than all other combinations
How many participants were used?
1364 families with newborn babies born in 1991 from different states
How did they make the study more generalisable?
They used a variety of ethnicities, races and socioeconomic status’
Who did they exclude from the study?
Teenage mothers, children with disabilities, families leaving the area and mothers without good english
How was the study designed?
As a longitudinal study that used observations and interviews, questionnaires and child assessments from NICHD SECCYD
Was the data primary or secondary?
Secondary
What did they measure in children at 24 months?
IQ
What tests did they use with 54 months?
Woodstock Johson Memory - STM
Tests for language
Woodstock Johnson Letter Word Identification
Woodstock Johnson Applied Problems - Maths
Which part of hypothesis 1 was found to be true?
That early care would improve cognition as there was a significant difference of 0.28 at the p<0.001 level
Which part of hypothesis 1 wasn’t entirely proved?
That High-Low would be the same as Low-Low, supported by lang and read but refuted by maths (p<0.1) 0.17 and memory (p<0.05) 0.20
What significant differences were found for hypothesis 2 (late high better than late low)?
lang - 0.19
read - 0.28
maths - 0.22 (p<0.001)
What was found for children receiving high quality early care and late care compared to those with low quality early care and high quality late care?
No difference for language and memory.
But High-Highs scored better than Low-Highs for
Reading (p<0.05) 0.20
Maths (p<0.1) 0.17
What did they find for hypothesis 3 (high-high vs low-low)
Significant on all measures: mem p<0.1 - 0.16 lang p<0.001 - 0.35 read p<0.05 - 0.17 maths p<0.001 - 0.28
What did they find for hypothesis 3 (high-high vs high-low)
True except for memory so memory formed earlier
lang p<0.01 - 0.21
read p<0.1 - 0.17
maths p<0.1 - 0.15
What did they find for hypothesis 3 (high-high vs low-high)?
No difference for language and memory.
But High-Highs scored better than Low-Highs for
Reading (p<0.05) 0.20
Maths (p<0.1) 0.17
What were the general findings?
> HQ early care helps memory
HQ early care is best with HQ late care
HQ late is better than HQ early if can only choose 1
What is a strength of the sample?
Generalisable, large sample, different US states
What is a strength of the data used?
Secondary data, easier to gather more of it, lots of methods for gathering it - interviews, observations, questionaires, tests
What is the application?
Helps parents who can only afford one daycare
What is a disadvantage of the study?
The way the quality of daycare was categorised was oversimplified and didn’t include a variety of factors such as social skills
What is a disadvantage of the sample?
It was biased towards the economically advantages and didn’t use teenage mothers
