A Path Not Taken
Review by John T. Bruer
Whether or not a child becomes a toxic or nontoxic member of society
is largely determined by what happens to the child in terms of his experiences
with his parents and primary caregivers in those first three years"
(Barton, 1998). This statement, made by the actor Rob Reiner to county
government officials in 1998 promoting his I Am Your Child campaign, is
a strong formulation of the thesis of infant determinism. Infant determinism
is the doctrine that early childhood experiences have irreversible, lifelong
effects. A child's first steps on the path of life determine the child's
final destination. judging from policy discussions, media coverage, and
conversations with parents, infant determinism is extremely popular.
"The effects of early experiences, important at the time, will only
be prolonged if similar experiences follow" (p. 22). This quote is
Ann and Allen Clarkes' thesis in Early Experience and the Life Path.
Their statement captures a view of child development that emphasizes long-term
complexity and indeterminism. The first steps on life's path are important,
but still leave many routes open to diverse outcomes. This indeterminist
thesis is relatively unpopular in policy, parenting, and even some academic
circles.
Indeterminism's persistent unpopularity prompted the Clarkes to publish
their book. Since the early 1950s, their research has indicated that children
are highly resilient and show remarkable recovery from early privation,
if their life circumstances improve. In 1977, their edited volume, Early
Experience: Myth and Evidence, reviewed the scientific evidence on
the long-term effects of early experience and made, they thought, a compelling
case for indeterminism. The new book is a sequel that the authors had
hoped would now be only of historical interest. Yet, as they say, today
the "quality media" and even some child development professionals
hold firmly to the belief that early childhood experiences have lifelong,
irreversible consequences.
Although their book is concise, logically constructed, and well written,
it is unlikely to turn the popular prodeterminism tidal wave. It is an
academic, not a popular work. It reads like an extremely elegant review
article. Appreciating the level and subtlety of their argument requires
some prior knowledge of the field. For example, they distinguish between
critical periods (abrupt onset, rapid offset) and sensitive periods (abrupt
onset, extended offset) in development, but do not define these terms
for the lay reader. And like a good review, the book is not self-contained;
rather, it encourages the reader to go beyond the text to reread and evaluate
for oneself the cited studies and evidence. These factors raise significant
barriers to understanding for policy diehards, on-deadline journalists,
and the general reader.
Yet these same factors make the book a valuable resource for scientists
or scholars who want a guidebook to assess research on the impact of early
experience. Although the presentation might be too telegraphic for the
general reader, it provides pointers to issues, arguments, and evidence
that the interested reader cannot help but follow. It provokes the reader
to explore methodological and evidentiary trails that one might otherwise
ignore. The Clarkes' opening quote from A. N. Whitehouse establishes an
appropriate tone for this exploration: "The doctrines which best
repay critical examination are those which for the longest time have remained
unquestioned" (p. 7). For these reasons, Early Experience and
the Life Path would be a superb text around which to organize an upper
level undergraduate or graduate seminar on early childhood experience.
A Critical Guidebook
The Clarkes' guidebook opens with a brief historical introduction to
orient the reader, summarizing the philosophical and scholarly origins
of both the determinist and indeterminist theses. To help the reader assess
scientific evidence, the Clarkes provide methodological guidelines. Prospective
studies are preferable to retrospective studies and the two study designs
often lead to different conclusions. Sample loss can distort follow-up
results. Sample selection and methods can limit a study's generalizablity.
Finally, tests of critical or sensitive period hypotheses cannot ignore
what happens to experimental subjects in the period between the end of
experimental intervention and data collection. This important caveat is
explicit in the Clarkes' positive thesis: Effects of early experience,
although important at the time, will only have prolonged impact if similar
advantageous or disadvantageous circumstances persist. This methodological
caveat is worth several weeks discussion in a child development course.
It is often overlooked in policy and popular discussions, as well as in
some scientific contexts.
Once oriented, the Clarkes guide the reader in evaluating three "If
P, then Q" hypotheses, by reviewing the evidence that
not-Q to conclude that not-P. The three hypotheses (Chapters
3-5) are (a) if early experience has long-term effects, then the impact
of early experience should be evident under conditions of normal development,
where the quality of early experiences is most likely to persist, in the
form of strong correlations between early and adult measures of characteristics;
(b) if early experience has long-term effects, then severely deprived
and abused children should remain permanently impaired despite improved
circumstances in later life; and (c) if early experience has long-term
effects, then children who suffer less severe early adversity (late adoption,
sociocultural deprivation) are unlikely to show recovery. The evidence
for not-Q ranges from studies showing lack of correlation between early
and late measures of IQ, shyness, and social deprivation to studies of
Romanian orphans and late adoptees to the effects of early intervention
programs like Head Start and the Abecedarian Project. All students of
child development should have a critical understanding of the research
the Clarkes survey in these chapters.
In the spirit of critical assessment, the Clarkes conclude with a discussion
of what they believe is the strongest evidence against their thesis. This
includes the research of Michael Butter and the English and Romanian study
team and Elinor Ames and Kim Chisholm's Canadian-based study on globally
deprived Romanian orphans. This work, especially O'Connor et al. (2000),
prompt the Clarkes to modify their original thesis, granting that O'Connor
et al.'s results leave open the possibility that there is a "sensitive
period" of indeterminate duration begining after age six months,
where further extreme privation results in "less, and in some cases
far less, spectacular gains" (p. 101) after adoption.
Exploring New Terrain
On the basis of the evidence presented, should the Clarkes modify their
thesis? Asking this question leads one through some interesting, new terrain
on the logic, design, and interpretation of experiments to test sensitive
period hypotheses. A sensitive period experiment requires that the experimental
intervention vary in age of onset and duration (e.g., suturing kittens'
right eyes shut at varying ages for varying durations), with a later measure
of the behavior of interest (e.g., visual function). The measured values
are then compared with those for a control group that did not experience
the intervention. The age and shortest duration for which the results
differ significantly between an experimental and the control group defines
the sensitive period. We can do these experiments on rats, kittens, and
monkeys, but we may not so intentionally manipulate experience during
human development. Human studies rely on less well-controlled natural
experiments, where groups of people have had unusual early experience,
starting at different ages and for varying durations. For example, to
test whether there is a sensitive period for second-language grammar acquisition,
we can compare second-language performance of individuals who had their
first exposure to the second language at varying ages with the performance
of native speakers. The scientific interest, interest as distinct from
the humanitarian in Romanian orphans is that they have been subjects in
a tragic natural experiment, where the "intervention" was early
global deprivation and neglect.
O'Connor et al. (2000) reported on one aspect of this natural experiment.
In the O'Connor et al. study, the three "experimental groups"
of Romanian orphans experienced up to six months, between six and 24 months,
or between 24 and 42 months of institutionalization before adoption by
families in the United Kingdom. The control group was infants from the
United Kingdom adopted before age six months. At age four years, a comparison
of the first two experimental groups (0-6 months and 6 24 months of institutionalization)
on measures of cognitive competence, showed remarkable developmental recovery
among the Romanian orphans, but also found that Romanian infants adopted
after age six months, although scoring within the normal range, scored
a standard deviation below Romanian infants adopted before age six months.
The Clarkes take this result as suggesting the existence of a sensitive
period beginning after age six months when children appear to suffer irreversible
damage from institutionalization (p. 92).
However, this result itself does not support a sensitive period hypothesis.
Although the period of institutionalization varied, the age of assessment
did not. The Romanian children were evaluated at age four, six, or both
four and six years. This design, as O'Connor et al. (2000) stated, confounds
duration of institutional deprivation with duration of adoptive remediation.
This is analogous to assessing English proficiency of nonnative speakers
at age 18 where one group was first exposed to English before age three
and the second group was first exposed to English at age 15. One would
expect that speakers with at least 15 years of exposure to English to
be more proficient than speakers who had at most three years exposure.
Practice effects are not sensitive period effects.
To address this problem, O'Connor et al. (2000) performed a regression
analysis that allowed them to compare infants who had experienced up to
18 months institutionalization and between 30 and 48 months adoption with
infants who had experienced up to 42 months institutionalization and between
30 and 48 months in the adopted home. They found significant cognitive
and developmental differences in favor of the early (0-18 month) adoptees
and concluded that duration of deprivation is a more powerful predictor
of individual differences than is time in the adoptive home. This analysis
makes the O'Connor et al. study analogous to a second-language acquisition
study where first exposure to the second language (i.e., time spent in
the native country) is a better negative predictor of second-language
proficiency than duration of exposure to the second language (i.e., time
spent in the new language environment). Such studies are typically interpreted
as supporting sensitive period claims.
But here the path can take a new turn. Another, often tacit, assumption
in sensitive period experiments is that the experience after the intervention
ends and before the assessment is made is the same for all experimental
groups. For example, it assumed that 10 years of experience with English
as a second language between the ages of 3 and 13 is the same as 10 years
of experience with English between the ages of 15 and 25. Recent research
on second-language acquisition suggests, however, that early age at immigration
is correlated with increased formal schooling in the second language and
late age at immigration is correlated with increased home use of the native
language. If one corrects for these confounds, there no longer appears
to be a sensitive period for second-language grammar acquisition (Flege,
Yeni-Komshian, & Liu, 1999). Maybe the Clarkes conceded too much,
too soon. Is three years experience in an adoptive home for children ranging
in age from birth to 18 months the same as three years experience in an
adopted home for children ranging in age from 24 to 42 months? If not,
later experience may still be a significant factor affecting the eventual
outcome. This is an open question, but one that research could answer.
The work on second language acquisition suggests that maybe sensitive
periods should be our hypotheses of last resort, rather than our default
hypotheses. If studies of child development took this new path, rather
than the popular well-trodden one, where might it lead?
References
Barton, M. A. (1998). Reiner: Justice starts in the high chair not
electric chair. Retrieved August 10, 1998, from www.naco.org/pubs/cnews
Clarke, A. M., & Clarke, A. D. B. (Eds.). (1977). Early experience:
Myth and evidence. New York: Free Press.
Flege, J. E., Yeni-Komshian, G. H., & Liu, S. (1999). Age constraints
on second language acquisition. Memory and Language 41, 78-104.
O'Connor, T. G., Rutter, M., & Beckett, C. (2000). The effects of
global severe privation on cognitive competence: Extension and longitudinal
follow-up. Child Development, 71, 376-390.
This material was originally published in Contemporary Psychology, APA
Review of Books, June 2002, 268-70. © Copyright 2002 by the American
Psychological Association. Posted with permission. No further reproduction
or distribution is permitted without the written permission of the American
Psychological Association.
APA Journals http://www.apa.org/journals
|