Infant touching behaviour during mother–infant face‐to‐face interactions

Abstract

The study of infant communication during mother-infant interactions has largely focused on infants' distal behaviours, while neglecting their more proximal behaviours, such as touch. Yet, touch is an important modality through which infants and mothers communicate; it is also a vital means through which infants self-regulate and explore their surroundings. The present study was designed to investigate the touching behaviours of 44, 5 1/2-month-old, healthy, full-term infants during face-to-face mother-infant interactions. A still-face (SF) procedure was used in order to examine differences in the types and locations of infant touch across normal and perturbed interaction periods, when mothers exhibit changes in their emotional availability. Results revealed that infant touch varied with changes in maternal availability. During the SF period, when mothers were unavailable, infants used more active, soothing, and reactive tactile behaviours (stroke, finger, pat, and pull), and they spent more time touching themselves. In contrast, infants used mostly passive touch (static) during the Normal periods, when their mothers were available. They also spent a significant portion of time touching their mothers. The variations in infant touch across periods suggest that infants communicate their affective states through touch. The findings also support the regulatory and exploratory roles of infant touch, especially during periods of maternal unavailability.

Investigating Maternal Touch and Infants' Self‐Regulatory Behaviours during a Modified Face‐to‐Face Still‐Face with Touch Procedure

“…Previous investigations have documented that infants rely on several regulatory strategies to effectively maintain or reduce their arousal (Bridges, Denham, & Ganiban, ; Kopp, ; Rothbart, Ziaie, & O'Boyle, ). For example, results from studies have demonstrated that across periods of the SF procedure, infants engage in a number of self‐regulatory behaviours (e.g., gaze aversion, attention‐seeking, exploration, and self‐soothing), but the durations of these behaviours change when the regulatory support of caregivers becomes unavailable during the SF period (Braungart‐Rieker et al, ; Moszkowski & Stack, ; Weinberg & Tronick, ). In addition, evidence suggests a clear association between infants' self‐regulatory strategies and infants' current emotional and attentional states.…”

“…There is consistent evidence that infants respond to the SF period by displaying a 'signature' SF effect that consists of a decrease in positive affect, with an increase in gazing away from mothers, fretting, and neutral affect (see Adamson & Frick, 2003;Mesman, van Ijzendoorn, & Bakermans-Kranenburg, 2009). Furthermore, as a means to cope with the distress associated with the SF period, infants increase their use of self-regulatory behaviours, such as self-touch, exploration, and gaze aversion (e.g., Manian & Bornstein, 2009;Moszkowski & Stack, 2007;Weinberg & Tronick, 1996). Such responses are an indication that in the context of maternal emotional unresponsiveness, infants resort to using their own internal regulatory mechanisms (Braungart-Rieker, Garwood, Powers, & Natoro, 1998;Gianino & Tronick, 1988).…”

Infant Massage and Quality of Early Mother–Infant Interactions: Are There Associations with Maternal Psychological Wellbeing, Marital Quality, and Social Support?

“…After delivery, touch becomes an important channel of communication during mother–infant interactions (De Chateau, 1976; Tronick, 1995; Stack, 2004; Moszkowski and Stack, 2007; Jean and Stack, 2009; Stack et al, unpublished). It occurs more than the 55% of time and communicates security and tenderness, reducing infants’ distress and promoting emotional regulation (Stack and Muir, 1990, 1992; Weiss et al, 2000; Jean et al, 2004; Jean and Stack, 2009).…”

Social encouragement can influence manual preference in 6 month-old-infants

“…Additionally, Moszkowski and Stack (2007) found that infants tried to touch their mothers more in the normal interactions than during the maternal still-face episodes. However, Dibiasi and Einspieler (2002) failed to find an interaction between acoustic stimulation and spontaneous arm movements in 12-week-old infants.…”