Department of Education, Derwent College, University of York, York, YO10 5DD, UK.
Department of Psychology, University of Bath, Bath, BA2 7AY, UK.
J Commun Disord. 2020 May-Jun;85:105984. doi: 10.1016/j.jcomdis.2020.105984. Epub 2020 Mar 5.
Longitudinal research into the development of prosociality during childhood contributes to our understanding of individual differences in social and emotional outcomes. There is a dearth of literature on the development of prosociality in children with Developmental Language Disorder (DLD). Data from the UK based Millennium Cohort Study was used to investigate prosociality from age 5 to 11 years in 738 children at risk of Developmental Language Disorder (r-DLD) and 12,972 children in a general population (GP) comparison group. Multilevel mixed effects regression models were run to investigate the mean change in prosociality and latent class growth analysis was used to identify heterogeneous groups of children who shared similar patterns of development. Overall, children at risk of DLD were less prosocial at age 5 and, although they did become more prosocial by the age of 11, they did not reach the same levels of prosociality as those in the GP group. Subsequent sub group analysis revealed four distinct developmental trajectories: stable high (19 %), stable slightly low (36 %), decreasing to slightly low (5 %), and increasing to high (40 %). Children at risk of DLD were less likely than those in the GP group to be in the stable high class and more likely to be in the stable slightly low class. For children at risk of DLD, being prosocial was protective against concurrent social and emotional difficulties. But being prosocial in early childhood was not protective against later social and emotional difficulties nor did the absence of prosociality in early childhood make social and emotional difficulties in middle childhood inevitable. Rather, the presence of prosociality in middle childhood was the key protective factor, regardless of prosociality in early childhood. Prosociality is not a key area of concern for children at risk of DLD. Instead, it is an area of relative strength, which can be nurtured to mitigate social and emotional difficulties in children at risk of DLD, particularly in middle childhood.
儿童亲社会行为发展的纵向研究有助于我们理解社会和情感结果的个体差异。关于发育性语言障碍(DLD)儿童亲社会行为发展的文献很少。使用英国基于千年队列研究的数据,调查了 738 名发育性语言障碍高风险儿童(r-DLD)和 12972 名普通人群(GP)对照组儿童从 5 岁到 11 岁的亲社会行为。采用多级混合效应回归模型来研究亲社会行为的平均变化,并采用潜在类别增长分析来识别具有相似发展模式的儿童的异质群体。总体而言,发育性语言障碍高风险儿童在 5 岁时不太亲社会,尽管他们在 11 岁时变得更加亲社会,但他们并没有达到普通人群组的亲社会水平。随后的亚组分析揭示了四个不同的发展轨迹:稳定高(19%)、稳定略低(36%)、逐渐略低(5%)和逐渐高(40%)。发育性语言障碍高风险儿童比普通人群组更不可能处于稳定的高水平,而更有可能处于稳定的略低水平。对于发育性语言障碍高风险儿童,亲社会行为可预防并发的社会和情感困难。但是,在幼儿期亲社会并不能预防以后的社会和情感困难,也不能使幼儿期缺乏亲社会行为成为儿童中期社会和情感困难的必然。相反,无论幼儿期亲社会行为如何,儿童中期的亲社会行为是关键的保护因素。亲社会行为并不是发育性语言障碍高风险儿童关注的关键领域。相反,它是一个相对优势的领域,可以加以培养,以减轻发育性语言障碍高风险儿童的社会和情感困难,特别是在儿童中期。