Cited by 101Early Childhood Education and DevelopmentLanguage Development and DisordersChild and Animal Learning Development

Randomized controlled trial of a book-sharing intervention in a deprived South African community: Effects on carer–infant interactions, and their relation to infant cognitive and socioemotional outcome

Open access
Murray, Lynne, De Pascalis, Leonardo, Tomlinson, Mark, Vally, Zahir, Dadomo, Harold, MacLachlan, Brenda, Woodward, Charlotte, Cooper, Peter J.·2016·Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry

Abstract

Background: Consistent with evidence from high‐income countries ( HIC s), we previously showed that, in an informal peri‐urban settlement in a low‐middle income country, training parents in book sharing with their infants benefitted infant language and attention (Vally, Murray, Tomlinson, & Cooper, ). Here, we investigated whether these benefits were explained by improvements in carer–infant interactions in both book‐sharing and non‐book‐sharing contexts. We also explored whether infant socioemotional development benefitted from book sharing. Methods: We conducted a randomized controlled trial in Khayelitsha, South Africa. Carers of 14–16‐month‐old infants were randomized to 8 weeks’ training in book sharing ( n = 49) or a wait‐list control group ( n = 42). In addition to the cognitive measures reported previously, independent assessments were made at base line and follow‐up of carer–infant interactions during book sharing and toy play. Assessments were also made, at follow‐up only, of infant prosocial behaviour in a ‘help task’, and of infant imitation of doll characters’ nonsocial actions and an interpersonal interaction. Eighty‐two carer–infant pairs (90%) were assessed at follow‐up. (Trial registration ISRCTN 39953901). Results: Carers who received the training showed significant improvements in book‐sharing interactions (sensitivity, elaborations, reciprocity), and, to a smaller extent, in toy‐play interactions (sensitivity). Infants in the intervention group showed a significantly higher rate of prosocial behaviour, and tended to show more frequent imitation of the interpersonal interaction. Improvements in carer behaviour during book sharing, but not during toy play, mediated intervention effects on all infant cognitive outcomes, and tended to mediate intervention effects on infant interpersonal imitation. Conclusions: Training in book sharing, a simple, inexpensive intervention that has been shown to benefit infant cognitive development in a low‐middle income country, also shows promise for improving infant socioemotional outcomes in this context. Benefits are mediated by improvements in carer–infant interactions, particularly in book‐sharing contexts.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1111/jcpp.12605

Cites

34 of 34 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • At least one formal mediation analysis showed that improvements in caregiver book-sharing competence associated with training accounted for much of the improvement in child language.

    “There has been at least one formal mediation analysis (Murray et al., 2016) that showed how improvements in caregiver book-sharing competence associated with training accounted for much of the improvement in child language.”
  • Murray et al. (2016) reported that caregiver sensitivity gains mediated receptive language effects, while caregiver-child reciprocity mediated effects on both expressive and receptive language (and focal attention).

    “Murray and colleagues (2016) found that improvements in caregiver sensitivity during book-sharing significantly mediated the impact of the intervention on receptive language, while improvements in caregiver-child reciprocity during book-sharing mediated the impact of the intervention on both child expressive language and receptive language (and child focal attention).”

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 2

  1. [8]8. De Rosnay, M. Hughes, C. (2006). Conversation and theory of mind. British Journal of Developmental Psychology 24, 7-37.
  2. [10]10. Dunn, L.M., & Dunn, D.M. (1981). Peabody Picture Vocabulary Test, 4 th edn. (PPVT TM - 4). San Antonio: Pearson Publishing.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Murray, L., De Pascalis, L., Tomlinson, M., Vally, Z., Dadomo, H., MacLachlan, B., Woodward, C., & Cooper, P. J.
Affiliations
  • University of Cape Town (ZA)
  • Department of Psychology University of Reading Reading UK
  • Stellenbosch University (ZA)
  • University of Reading (GB)
  • University of Parma (IT)
  • University of Bath (GB)
Corresponding author
Murray, Lynne
Venue
Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2016-07-28
Volume
57
Issue
12
Pages
1370-1379
ISSN
  • 0021-9630 (ISSN-L)
  • 1469-7610
OpenAlex
W2487442389
Cited by
101
References
34
Citations by year
2026: 7 · 2025: 10 · 2024: 14 · 2023: 20 · 2022: 16 · 2021: 10 · 2020: 6 · 2019: 10 · 2018: 4 · 2017: 4
FWCI
30.93
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
  • CentAUR (University of Reading) (submittedVersion)
  • Archivio istituzionale della ricerca (Alma Mater Studiorum Università di Bologna) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
Funders
  • DG Murray Trust
  • Felix Foundation Fellowship
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Education › Early Childhood Education and Development
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Language Development and Disorders
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Child and Animal Learning Development
Keywords
book sharing, parent-infant interaction, social-emotional development, infant imitation, infant cognitive development, parent training intervention, low-income communities, peri-urban settlements, Khayelitsha, language development, attention development
MeSH terms
Adult, Child Development, Cognition, Education, Nonprofessional, Female, Follow-Up Studies, Humans, Infant, Male, Parent-Child Relations, Parents, Social Behavior, South Africa, Parenting, Infant Behavior

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review