does birth spacing affect adolescent cognitive ability among siblings in dyads
Download
Skip this Video
Download Presentation
Does Birth Spacing Affect Adolescent Cognitive Ability Among Siblings in Dyads?

Loading in 2 Seconds...

play fullscreen
1 / 40

Does Birth Spacing Affect Adolescent Cognitive Ability Among Siblings in Dyads? - PowerPoint PPT Presentation


  • 76 Views
  • Uploaded on

Does Birth Spacing Affect Adolescent Cognitive Ability Among Siblings in Dyads?. Author Author Date. Agenda. Introduction Hypothesis Significance Definitions Pathway Methods Results Conclusion Q&A. Hypothesis.

loader
I am the owner, or an agent authorized to act on behalf of the owner, of the copyrighted work described.
capcha
Download Presentation

PowerPoint Slideshow about ' Does Birth Spacing Affect Adolescent Cognitive Ability Among Siblings in Dyads? ' - britanney-kidd


An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation

Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author.While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server.


- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Presentation Transcript
agenda
Agenda
  • Introduction
    • Hypothesis
    • Significance
    • Definitions
    • Pathway
  • Methods
  • Results
  • Conclusion
  • Q&A
hypothesis
Hypothesis
  • Among the population of adolescents in the study, younger siblings of dyad pairs born further apart from their older siblings will have higher cognitive scores than those born closer to their older siblings.
  • That is, you’ll be smarter if your parents have you and your sibling further in time apart.
significance
Significance
  • How much time should you plan to set aside to have smart kids?
  • What makes you smarter than your younger sibling?
definitions
Definitions
  • Birth spacing

# months between sibling birth dates

  • Cognitive Ability
    • Peabody Picture Vocabulary Test
pathway
Pathway
  • More attention for child
  • Different interaction between siblings
  • More resources for care
literature review summary
Literature Review Summary
  • Mostly infant and early childhood samples
  • Contradicting results
    • Yes, there is an association1,2,4,5,7,8, 11
    • No, there is no association3,5, 6, 9, 10, 11
  • Weak controls in adolescent studies
our value added
Our Value Added
  • Study of adolescents
  • Stronger control for SES, gender, birth order, family size
  • Different cognitive measure
agenda1
Agenda
  • Introduction
  • Methods
    • Study design
    • Exposure & Outcome variables
    • Covariates
    • Models & Interaction
  • Results
  • Conclusion
  • Q&A
methods study design
Methods: Study Design
  • Child Health and Development Study
      • Prospective, longitudinal
      • Kaiser Foundation Health Plan, Oakland, California
      • Women and their children born 1959 – 1967
      • Adolescent Study (born between 1960 – 1963)
does birth spacing affect adolescent cognitive development figure 1
Does Birth Spacing Affect Adolescent Cognitive Development? Figure 1.

*also excludes 9 records with inconsistent family size between PREPROD and ADOL

methods exposure
Methods: Exposure
  • Birth space interval = birthday of younger sibling – birthday of older sibling
  • 3 versions of exposure:
    • Categorical exposure
    • Continuous exposure
    • Dual exposure (categorical and continuous)
methods exposure1
Methods: Exposure
  • Version 1: Categorical (5)
    • Second-born
      • ≤2 years
      • 2.1-3 years
      • 3.1-4 years
      • >4 years
    • First-born
  • Version 2: Continuous (months)
methods exposure2
Methods: Exposure
  • Version 3: Dual
    • Categorical
      • First-born
      • Second-born
    • Continuous (months)
methods outcome
Methods: Outcome
  • Continuous Peabody score (points)
  • In general:
    • SD = 15
    • Range = 0 to 160
  • In sample:
    • Range = 71 to 156
    • Mean = 117.9
    • SD = 14.3
methods covariates2
Methods: Covariates

Significance at p < 0.2

methods covariates3
Methods: Covariates

Significance at p < 0.2

methods full model covariates
Methods: Full Model Covariates

Significance: >10% change in coefficient of at least 1 exposure category

methods restricted model covariates
Methods: Restricted Model Covariates

Significance at > 10% change in coefficient of at least 2 exposure categories

methods quadratic model testing
Methods: Quadratic Model Testing

Tiny magnitude

  • Continuous birth spacing variable
  • B = 0.001 , p = 0.13

Pretty linear

methods interaction
Methods: Interaction

Continuous exposure model

  • Significance set at p < 0.2:
    • Birth spacing /race
    • Birth spacing /child sex

Revised model

  • Significance set at p < 0.2:
    • Birth spacing /child sex
    • Race /child sex
    • Birth spacing / child sex / race
agenda2
Agenda
  • Introduction
  • Methods
  • Results
    • Categorical Model
    • Continuous Model
    • Dual Model
    • Interaction
  • Conclusion
  • Q&A
results interaction1
Results: Interaction

** holding other covariates constant

agenda3
Agenda
  • Introduction
  • Methods
  • Results
  • Conclusion
    • Summary
    • Limitations & Strengths
    • Future Directions
  • Q&A
summary
Summary
  • Slight inverse relationship between birth spacing and Peabody score
  • Negligible difference in Peabody score
  • Interaction from gender and race
limitations
Limitations
  • Small sample size
  • Limited information on first-born siblings
    • No PREPROD record
  • Unable to compare scores within dyad
  • Operationalizing cognitive ability
strengths
Strengths
  • Statistical rigor
    • Limiting confounders
    • Extensive covariates list
    • Interactions
future directions
Future Directions
  • Bigger sample size
  • Designs that can account for what we could not
    • Different family sizes
    • Intra-family differences in Peabody score
    • Missing covariates
  • Exploring variables underlying interactions
agenda4
Agenda
  • Introduction
  • Methods
  • Results
  • Conclusion
  • Q&A
    • Thank you!
references
References
  • Breland HM. Birth order, family configuration, and verbal achievement, Child Development. 1974;43:1011–1019.
  • Dandes HM and Dow D. Relation of intelligence to family size and density, Child Development. 1969;40: 641–645. 
  • Gibbs ED, Teti DM, Bond LA. Infant-Sibling Communication Relationships to Birth-Spacing and Cognitive and Linguistic Development. Infant Behavior and Development. 1987;10(3):307-324.
  • Kamin KD, Kubinger, Schubert MR. Sibling constellation and intelligence in behavior disordered children, Zeitschrift fur klinischePsychologieforschung und Praxis. 1981;10:98– 109.
  • Lancer I, Rim Y. Intelligence Family Size and Sibling Age Spacing. Personality and Individual Differences. 1984;5(2):151-158.
  • Lewis M, Jaskir J. Infant Intelligence and its Relation to Birth Order and Birth Spacing. Infant Behavior and Development. 1983;6(1):117-120.
  • Nuttall EV and Nuttall RL. Child spacing effects on intelligence, personality, and social competence, Journal of Psychology . 1979;102:3–12.
references1
References
  • Record RG, McKeown T, Edwards HH. An investigation of the difference in measured intelligence between twins and single births, Annals of Human Genetics. 1970;84:11–20.
  • Rodgers JL, Rowe DC. Does Contiguity Breed Similarity? A Within-Family Analysis of Nonshared Sources of IQ Differences between Siblings. Dev Psychol. 1985;21(5):743- 746.
  • Teti DM, Bond LA, Gibbs ED. Sibling-Created Experiences Relationships to Birth-Spacing and Infant Cognitive Development. Infant Behavior and Development. 1986;9(1):27-42.
  • Wagner ME, Schubert HJP, Schubert DSP. Effects of Sibling Spacing on Intelligence Interfamilial Relations Psychosocial Characteristics and Mental and Physical Health. Reese, H.W.(Ed.). Advances in Child Development and Behavior, Vol.19.X+260p.Academic Press Inc., Publishers: Orlando, Fla., Usa; Academic Press Inc.(London) Ltd.: London, England. Illus. 1985:149-206.
ad