Abstract of Distinction: Social Development Intervention in Childhood and Functioning in the Next Generation

Introduction: Might early childhood intervention with one generation reach into the next generation? Intergenerational studies (Bailey, et al., 2009; Capaldi, et al., 2003; Conger, et al., 2003; Serbin & Karp, 2004; Thornberry, et al., 2003) have clearly demonstrated that early childhood experiences in one generation can carry over into adulthood, and consequently affect the next generation. In a parallel body of evidence, recent studies provide examples of long-term effects of childhood intervention 20+ years later into adulthood (Hawkins, et al., 2008; Olds, et al., 2014; Patterson, et al. 2010; Sandler, et al., 2011; Wolchik, et al., 2013). The present study examines the question: might the benefits of childhood interventions reach not only into adulthood for those who experienced the intervention, but also into the next generation? The study examines whether participation in the Raising Healthy Children (RHC) intervention in grades 1-6 in the Seattle Social Development Project was associated with better functioning in the children of that sample, 17-24 years later.

Methods: The SSDP longitudinal study (N=808) implemented the RHC intervention in a quasi-experimental trial consisting of teacher training in classroom instruction and management, child social and emotional skill development, and parent workshops in grades 1-6 for parents (G1) and their children (G2). Developmentally consistent intervention findings have been published from grade 2 through age 30 (Hill, et al., 2014). The SSDP Intergenerational Study (TIP) examines those SSDP families raising children of their own (N=383). Regression analyses for the present paper investigated whether intervention differences are observed in the next generation (G3). Extensive testing of threats to validity revealed no issues with differential eligibility, recruitment or retention in TIP by G2 intervention status.

Results: Results indicate that, compared to children of control parents, the G3 children of full intervention (grades 1-6) parents (1) were significantly less likely to show evidence of parent/interviewer assessed developmental delays (ages 1-5 years), (2) had significantly lower teacher-rated oppositional defiance, ADHD and higher academic skills (ages 6-17), and (3) were less likely to initiate drugs (alcohol, tobacco or marijuana, ages 6-17).

Conclusions: Discussion focuses on the long-term potential for early childhood interventions to reach not only into adulthood, but also into the next generation, and encourages other studies capable of long-term intervention follow-up to examine outcomes in the children of their intervention participants as well.