Motor training at 3 months affects object exploration 12 months later

Abstract

The development of new motor skills alters how infants interact with objects and people. Consequently, it has been suggested that motor skills may initiate a cascade of events influencing subsequent development. However, only correlational evidence for this assumption has been obtained thus far. The current study addressed this question experimentally by systematically varying reaching experiences in 40 three-month-old infants who were not reaching on their own yet and examining their object engagement in a longitudinal follow-up assessment 12 months later. Results revealed increased object exploration and attention focusing skills in 15-month-old infants who experienced active reaching at three months of age compared to untrained infants or infants who only passively experienced reaching. Further, grasping activity after – but not before – reaching training predicted infants’ object exploration 12 months later. These findings provide evidence for the long-term effects of reaching experiences and illustrate the cascading effects initiated by early motor skills.

Characteristics of brief sticky mittens training that lead to increases in object exploration

“…The current findings together with previous studies using active sticky mittens training indicate that this training paradigm influences cognitive, motor, and social development (Libertus, Joh, & Needham, 2016; Libertus & Needham, 2010, 2011; Sommerville, Woodward, & Needham, 2005; Gerson & Woodward, 2013; Skerry, Carey, and Spelke, 2013; Rakison & Krogh, 2012; Wiesen, Watkins, & Needham, 2016). Based on what we know about the nature of development, it is likely that experiences that stem from infants' own actions with their bodies (like sticky mittens training) would have beneficial effects on learning and development (e.g., Needham & Libertus, 2011).…”

“…Indeed, active mittens training has been found to encourage grasping behaviors in infants at high familial risk for ASD (Libertus & Landa, 2014). Although improvements in infants' object exploration and focused attention on objects has been demonstrated in typically-developing infants (Libertus et al, 2016; Wiesen et al, 2016), long-term effects of sticky mittens training for at-risk infants remains unknown. Future research is needed to resolve these questions.…”

“…In a study comparing the effects of two weeks of active (sticky) versus passive (non-sticky) mittens training, infants who participated in the active experience showed more exploration of objects and began reaching for objects earlier in development than infants who received the passive experience (Libertus & Needham, 2010). This enhanced exploration of objects has been shown to last for at least 12 months after training (Libertus, Joh, & Needham, 2016). …”

Neural correlates of infant action processing relate to theory of mind in early childhood

“…Research suggests that the ability to coordinate goal-directed action develops considerably in infancy (e.g., McCarty, Clifton, & Collard, 1999;von Hofsten, 1991). Several behavioral studies have demonstrated that infant motor behavior can index EF, the cognitive processes that support self-regulation, early in life (for review see: Diamond, 2006), and recent longitudinal (e.g., Libertus, Joh, & Needham, 2016) and correlational studies (Gottwald, Achermann, Marciszko, Lindskog, & Gredeback, 2016) suggest that infants' own actions are associated with broad improvements in attention and EF. Given these associations between infant action and EF (Gottwald et al, 2016;Libertus et al, 2016) and strong associations between EF and TOM (e.g., Austin, Groppe, & Elsner, 2014;Carlson, Mandell, & Williams, 2004), it could be that infants' control of their own actions is a precursor to EC, and that EC in turn predicts TOM.…”

“…Several behavioral studies have demonstrated that infant motor behavior can index EF, the cognitive processes that support self‐regulation, early in life (for review see: Diamond, ), and recent longitudinal (e.g., Libertus, Joh, & Needham, ) and correlational studies (Gottwald, Achermann, Marciszko, Lindskog, & Gredeback, ) suggest that infants’ own actions are associated with broad improvements in attention and EF. Given these associations between infant action and EF (Gottwald et al, ; Libertus et al, ) and strong associations between EF and TOM (e.g., Austin, Groppe, & Elsner, ; Carlson, Mandell, & Williams, ), it could be that infants’ control of their own actions is a precursor to EC, and that EC in turn predicts TOM. In the current study, we explore both the possibilities that infant action execution is directly associated with TOM, and that neural processing during infant action execution could reflect developmental precursors for EC.…”