512522

research-article2013

JADXXX10.1177/1087054713512522Allan et al.Allan et al.

Article

Does Gender Moderate the Relations Between Externalizing Behavior and Key Emergent Literacy Abilities? Evidence From a Longitudinal Study

Journal of Attention Disorders 201X, Vol XX(X) 1­–10 © 2013 SAGE Publications Reprints and permissions: sagepub.com/journalsPermissions.nav DOI: 10.1177/1087054713512522 jad.sagepub.com

Nicholas P. Allan1, Shauna W. Joye2, and Christopher J. Lonigan1

Abstract Objective: There is a significant negative relation between externalizing behavior and emergent literacy skills among preschool children. Method: The purpose of this study was to examine the impact of gender on the predictive relation of externalizing behavior and emergent literacy in a group of 178 preschool children (mean age = 48.50 months, SD = 3.66; 48% boys). Results: Externalizing behaviors predicted emergent literacy over time. Distinct patterns of predictive associations dependent on gender were found. Girls with higher levels of externalizing behaviors experienced less change in their vocabulary skills compared with the vocabulary change shown by girls with lower levels of these problem behaviors. Conclusion: The results suggest that early identification programs that include externalizing behavior problems and their relation with emergent literacy development should account for potential gender differences. A theoretical framework in which girls with behavior problems receive less opportunity for vocabulary acquisition is presented. (J. of Att. Dis. XXXX; XX(X) X-XX) Keywords gender, externalizing, emergent literacy, preschool Reading skills serve as the foundation for acquisition of knowledge across academic domains throughout a child’s educational career (Chall, Jacobs, & Baldwin, 1990; Stanovich, 1986). Although overall reading skills have been stable or increasing over the past few decades according to National Association of Education Progress (NAEP) reports, the most recent NAEP report revealed that 33% of fourth graders in the United States are still not performing at a basic reading level (National Center on Educational Statistics, 2011). Compared with their peers, children who struggle with learning to read become less avid readers and perform worse on measures of vocabulary, reading comprehension, and general knowledge (Cunningham & Stanovich, 1997). Substantial deficits in reading that occur early in a child’s educational experience lead to a number of negative outcomes, ranging from academic deficits to interpersonal, behavioral, and occupational problems (Cunningham & Stanovich, 1997; McGee, Prior, Williams, Smart, & Sanson, 2002; Spreen, 1988; Stone & La Greca, 1990). Given the strong connection between early literacy skills and later reading acquisition, as well as the importance of reading acquisition for children’s long-term success in academics and other areas, it is important to understand factors that influence children’s acquisition of early literacy skills.

Developmental Precursors to Early Reading Skills Emergent literacy skills are the developmental precursors of conventional forms of reading and writing (Teale & Sulzby, 1986; Whitehurst & Lonigan, 1998). Empirical research indicates that among these skills, phonological awareness, print knowledge, and oral language are the strongest and most consistent predictors of later reading ability (Ehri et al., 2001; Lonigan, Burgess, & Anthony, 2000). In a meta-analysis of skills related to reading development, Lonigan, Schatschneider, and Westberg (2008) reported that measures of phonological awareness, print knowledge, and oral language, among other measured skills (e.g., concepts about print, rapid automatic naming of letters, digits, objects and colors, and name writing), were all significant and moderate predictors of later reading outcomes. 1

Florida State University, Tallahassee, USA Georgia Southern University, Statesboro, GA

2

Corresponding Author: Nicholas P. Allan or Christopher J. Lonigan, Department of Psychology, Florida State University, 1107 W. Call Street, Tallahassee, FL 323064301, USA. Email: [email protected]; [email protected]

Downloaded from jad.sagepub.com at NANYANG TECH UNIV LIBRARY on June 8, 2016

2

Journal of Attention Disorders XX(X)

Phonological awareness refers to a child’s sensitivity to the sound structure of language and includes the ability to hear and manipulate increasingly smaller units of sound, such as syllables and phonemes. Print knowledge refers to a child’s knowledge of the nature and conventions of written language, such as understanding that words are read from left to right and recognizing letter names and sounds. Oral language refers to a child’s vocabulary and ability to understand and use words in the appropriate context to convey meaning to others (Lonigan, 2006). Phonological awareness and print knowledge are precursors of decoding (i.e., the ability to identify the words in print and produce meaningful sounds from these words accurately and fluently; Lonigan, 2006). Oral language is a precursor of reading comprehension (i.e., constructing a coherent mental representation of a text; Lonigan et al., 2000; Storch & Whitehurst, 2002).

Associations Between Literacy Skills and Externalizing Behavior Problems A substantial body of research has also linked externalizing behaviors—in particular, inattention, hyperactivity/impulsivity (H/I), and oppositional behavior—to reading and academic outcomes (Masten et al., 2005; Spira, Bracken, & Fischel, 2005). Among elementary school and older children, externalizing behaviors relate uniquely to decoding and oral language depending on the specific behavior problem examined. Research across age groups has generally supported the fact that decoding skills are more strongly associated with inattention than with H/I or oppositional behavior, and language skills are more strongly associated with H/I and oppositional behavior than with inattention. For example, Rabiner and Coie (2000) found that inattention was a significant predictor of performance on a decoding task, controlling for disruptive behavior. Similarly, children who were identified as poor readers using a measure of decoding skills displayed more severe problems with inattention than did a comparison group of typical readers; in contrast, rates of self- and parent-reported aggression, which is a correlate of oppositional behavior (Biederman, Ball, Monuteaux, Kaiser, & Faraone, 2008), were not different between poor and typical readers, as indicated by a measure of decoding skills (E. M. Arnold et al., 2005). With regard to oral language, Piel (1990) found that physical aggression was correlated with poor oral language among a sample of 7- to 9-year-old children. Longitudinally, Beitchman et al. (1996) found that children with language impairment at age 5 years had significantly more delinquent and aggressive behaviors and hyperactivity ratings at follow-up 7 years later than did control children. In contrast to the specific relations between externalizing behaviors and literacy in older children, the specific relations between externalizing behaviors and emergent literacy skills in preschool children are equivocal. Sims and Lonigan

(2013) reported that inattention, and not H/I, was significantly related to measures of phonological awareness and print knowledge among preschool children. Lonigan et al. (1999) reported similar findings in a low-income sample. McGee, Partridge, Williams, and Silva (1991) examined differences in emergent literacy skills between preschool children labeled hyperactive, difficult to manage, and a control group of preschool children and found that hyperactive children performed significantly worse than the control group on three measures of oral language. Observations of preschool children’s aggression were reported to be related to an emergent literacy measure that comprised mainly of tests of language development (D. H. Arnold, 1997; Bonica, Arnold, Fisher, Zeljo, & Yershova, 2003). Other researchers have detected little to no relation between aggregated emergent literacy measures and externalizing behaviors (e.g., Sonuga-Barke, Lamparelli, Stevenson, Thompson, & Henry, 1994; Willoughby, Kupersmidt, Voegler-Lee, & Bryant, 2011). One limiting factor for finding specific links between externalizing behaviors and emergent literacy skills is that many studies either aggregate behavior problems, emergent literacy skills, or both in preschool samples (e.g., Doctoroff, Greer, & Arnold, 2006; Gilliam & de Mesquita, 2000) and, therefore, limit understanding of the specificity of these relations.

The Moderating Effects of Gender Gender may be another factor that accounts for the modest number of significant findings regarding the relation between emergent literacy skills and externalizing behaviors. Preschool girls tend to have higher levels of emergent literacy skills and lower levels of externalizing behavior problems than do preschool boys (e.g., Huttenlocher, Haight, Bryk, Seltzer, & Lyons, 1991; Justice, Invernizzi, Geller, Sullivan, & Welsch, 2005; Newcorn et al., 2001; Winsler & Wallace, 2002). These differences may be based on divergent developmental trajectories for boys and girls that are due to biological, psychological, and social factors (Keenan & Shaw, 1997). Furthermore, it is possible that developmental differences emerge in preschool that account for differential relations between externalizing behavior and emergent literacy difficulties. Few studies have examined the potential moderating effects of gender on the relations between externalizing behaviors and emergent literacy skills in preschool children. Stowe, Arnold, and Ortiz (1999) reported a significantly stronger association between disruptive behavior and language skills for boys than for girls in a sample of 185 preschool children (94 boys) from low-socioeconomic status (SES) families. Doctoroff et al. (2006) examined the association between classroom observed aggression and a composite of several emergent literacy skills in a sample of 123 preschool children (60 boys) from low-SES families

Downloaded from jad.sagepub.com at NANYANG TECH UNIV LIBRARY on June 8, 2016

3

Allan et al. and reported that aggression was significantly and negatively correlated with emergent literacy skills for boys only. Friedman-Weieneth, Harvey, Youngwirth, and Goldstein (2007) reported a significantly stronger relation between teacher-rated inattention (controlling for hyperactivity and aggression) and pre-academic skills for girls than boys in a sample of 280 young preschool children (152 boys). To our knowledge, these concurrent studies are the only ones to have examined gender as a moderator of behavior problems and emergent literacy skills in preschool children.

Nonclinician Examiners as a Potential Source of Behavior Ratings It is now widely agreed that children’s behavior problems can be best assessed by using multiple informants across multiple contexts (e.g., Dirks, De Los Reyes, BriggsGowan, Cella, & Wakschlag, 2012; McConaughy et al., 2010). A potentially useful source of information is nonclinician examiners who are assessing children’s academic skills. For example, nonclinician examiners who administered several cognitive and psychosocial measures to 3-year-old children, over the course of a 3-hr assessment, provided externalizing behavior ratings of these children that significantly predicted the children’s externalizing behavior at the age of 5 (Kerr, Lunkenheimer, & Olson, 2007). Similarly, other researchers have found that young children’s behaviors as rated by nonclinician examiners with only limited time to interact with children (roughly 3 hr per interaction) provided incremental validity over and above parent and teacher externalizing behavior ratings in predicting children’s ADHD diagnoses (McConaughy et al., 2010) as well as level of functional impairment in preschool children diagnosed with ADHD (Willcutt, Hartung, Lahey, Loney, & Pelham, 1999). In one study, examiners rated children’s inattention after administering a brief (30-45 min) literacy assessment. Controlling for teacher ratings of inattention, examiner ratings were significantly associated with children’s vocabulary and letter knowledge skills (Allan et al., 2013). Therefore, it seems likely that nonclinician examiners administering academic measures to children in the classroom can provide valid and useful behavior ratings.

The Current Study The purpose of this study was to examine the moderating effects of gender on the predictive relation between specific externalizing behaviors measured just prior to children’s entry into preschool and specific emergent literacy skills measured 2 to 3 months later, controlling for initial levels of emergent literacy skills. Compared with studies of schoolage children, there have been fewer studies concerning the relations between externalizing behaviors and academic

development with preschool children, and few of these studies have examined possible gender differences. Moreover, those studies of preschool children that have (a) examined gender differences have measured emergent literacy and other pre-academic skills as a single outcome, despite evidence that there are unique components of emergent literacy skills with different patterns of correlations with behavior problems and reading outcomes; (b) examined only a single component of externalizing behaviors, despite evidence that different behaviors have different relations with different aspects of reading-related outcomes; and (c) examined only concurrent relations between externalizing behaviors and emergent literacy skills. Based on previous literature (e.g., Friedman-Weieneth et al., 2007; Sims & Lonigan, 2013), it was hypothesized that the predictive relations between inattention and phonological awareness and print knowledge would be significant and would be moderated by gender such that the relation between inattention and these emergent literacy skills would be stronger in boys than in girls. These relations would be specific such that neither H/I nor oppositional behavior would be predictive of print knowledge or phonological awareness. It was also hypothesized that, consistent with prior findings (e.g., Doctoroff et al., 2006; Stowe et al., 1999), H/I and oppositional behavior would be predictive of oral language in boys but not in girls, and these relations would be specific such that inattention would not be predictive of oral language.

Method Participants Data for this study were obtained from an initial sample of 200 preschool children. Of these, 22 were lost to attrition by follow-up, leaving a sample of 178 children (mean age = 48.50 months, SD = 3.66) representing a broad range of family SES in North Florida. Both parental consent and child assent were obtained for each child’s participation. There were approximately equal numbers of boys (48%) and girls in the sample. The majority of the children were White (74% White, 15% African American, and 11% Other ethnicities). The distribution of ethnicities of the children in this sample was representative of the local area.

Measures The Test of Preschool Early Literacy (TOPEL; Lonigan, Wagner, Torgesen, & Rashotte, 2007) was used to assess emergent literacy skills. The TOPEL is a standardized diagnostic assessment that consists of three subtests: Phonological Awareness, Print Knowledge, and Definitional Vocabulary. The Phonological Awareness subtest comprises free-response and multiple-choice items that span the developmental

Downloaded from jad.sagepub.com at NANYANG TECH UNIV LIBRARY on June 8, 2016

4

Journal of Attention Disorders XX(X)

Table 1.  Descriptive Statistics and Zero-Order Correlations Among Externalizing Behaviors and Time 1 and Time 2 Emergent Literacy Skills. Variable

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

  1. Inattention — 2. Hyperactivity .71*** —   3. Oppositional .67*** .68*** —   4. Time 1 PA −.22** −.12 −.12 —   5. Time 1 PK −.12 −.05 −.12 .41*** —   6. Time 1 DV −.28*** −.14 −.24*** .30*** .31*** —   7. Time 2 PA −.23** −.18* −.30*** .48*** .41*** .45*** —   8. Time 2 PK −.19* −.13 −.19** .31*** .81*** .32*** .40*** —   9. Time 2 DV −.30*** −.20** −.31*** .31*** .27*** .59*** .50*** .33*** — Boy mean scores (SD) 2.37 (3.60) 7.24 (10.21) 1.02 (2.84) 89.36 (13.69)   99.69 (14.11) 96.50 (13.69)   94.94 (13.42) 103.71 (15.55) 102.69 (13.23) Girl mean scores (SD) 1.71 (2.78) 5.50 (7.48) 0.65 (1.89) 93.52 (14.72) 104.18 (17.42) 99.85 (11.44) 100.15 (16.86) 108.25 (15.65) 106.45 (11.51) t for gender contrast 1.39 1.31 1.03 1.95 1.89 1.78 2.27* 1.94 2.03* Note. N = 178 (n = 86 for boys, n = 92 for girls). Hyperactivity = hyperactivity/impulsivity; Oppositional = oppositional behavior; PA = phonological awareness; PK = print knowledge; DV = definitional vocabulary. *p ≤ .05. **p ≤ .01. ***p ≤ .001.

continuum of phonological awareness. The Print Knowledge subtest measures the understanding of the nature and purposes of books, printed words, and letters. The Definitional Vocabulary subtest measures children’s single-word spoken vocabulary and their ability to define words. Internal consistency reliabilities (αs = .87, .95, and .94, respectively, for Phonological Awareness, Print Knowledge, and Definitional Vocabulary subtests) and 1-week test–retest reliabilities (rs = .83, .89, and .81, respectively, for the three subtests) were high for 3- to 5-year-old children (Lonigan et al., 2007). Conners’ Teacher Rating Scale–Revised (CTRS-R; Conners, 1997) was used to measure inattention, H/I, and oppositional behavior. CTRS is commonly used to evaluate childhood behavior disorders (Conners, 1997) and has been shown to have good reliability and validity for a wide range of ages (Goyette, Conners, & Ulrich, 1978). The items that were used to measure each of the three behavior factors were those obtained through factor analysis of CTRS for preschool children (Gerhardstein, Lonigan, Cukrowicz, & McGuffey, 2003). For each of the 44 items, children were rated by examiners on a scale from 0 (not true at all; never, seldom) to 3 (very much true; very often, very frequent).

Procedure Timeline. The TOPEL was administered twice, once just prior to preschool entry (July) and again after children had been in preschool for between 2 and 3 months (October). Immediately following the administration of the TOPEL at Time 1, examiners completed a CTRS on the child they had assessed. Each assessment session was conducted in a quiet location at the children’s preschools and lasted approximately 30 min. Examiners.  Examiners included clinical psychology graduate students specializing in education research and undergraduate

students working toward psychology or related degrees. Similar raters in past studies have demonstrated similar levels of reliability and validity as compared with parent and teacher ratings (e.g., Phillips & Lonigan, 2010). Prior to assessing children, all examiners were extensively trained and required to demonstrate mastery of TOPEL administration and an understanding of how to complete the CTRS to ensure protocol fidelity.

Results Descriptive Statistics and Zero-Order Correlations Descriptive statistics for the TOPEL subscales at Time 1 and Time 2 as well as the CTRS scales at Time 1 are shown in the bottom panel of Table 1 for boys and girls separately. The CTRS demonstrated adequate reliability as determined by Cronbach’s alpha values (αs = .81 for inattention, .95 for H/I, and .85 for oppositional behavior). Analyses comparing children who completed measures at both Time 1 and Time 2 with the 22 children lost to attrition revealed mean differences in performance on the Print Knowledge, t(198) = 2.55, p ≤ .05, and Definitional Vocabulary, t(198) = 2.45, p ≤ .05, subscales, favoring children who remained in the study. There were no other differences related to attrition. At Time 2, girls scored higher than did boys on the Phonological Awareness, t(177) = 2.27, p ≤ .05, and Definitional Vocabulary, t(177) = 2.03, p ≤ .05, subscales. All TOPEL standard scores increased from Time 1 to Time 2 for both boys and girls (all ps ≤ .05). There were no differences between boys’ and girls’ Time 1 CTRS scores for any subscale (all ps > .05). Zero-order correlations between externalizing behavior scales and Time 1 and Time 2 TOPEL subscale scores are shown in the top panel of Table 1. The Inattention scale was negatively associated with all TOPEL

Downloaded from jad.sagepub.com at NANYANG TECH UNIV LIBRARY on June 8, 2016

5

Allan et al. subscales at Times 1 and 2 with the exception of the Time 1 Print Knowledge subscale. The H/I scale was only associated, negatively, with the Time 2 Phonological Awareness and Time 2 Definitional Vocabulary subscales. The Oppositional Behavior scale was negatively associated with the Time 1 Definitional Vocabulary subscale and all Time 2 TOPEL subscales.

Test of Moderation of Relations Between Time 1 Externalizing Behaviors and Time 2 Emergent Literacy by Gender (Controlling for Time 1 Emergent Literacy) Multilevel modeling in HLM Version 7 (Raudenbush, Bryk, Cheong, Congdon, & du Toit, 2011) using full information maximum likelihood was conducted. Crossclassified two-level models were used because children were nested within schools and within examiners. Regarding the nested status of the data, there were 20 preschools and 12 examiners. There was a range of one to four examiners in each school with a median of two examiners per school. Each examiner tested 1 to 15 schools with a median of three schools. Intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs) were examined to determine the amount of variance accounted for at the school- and examiner-level. For the Phonological Awareness subscale, the school-level ICC was .05 and the examinerlevel ICC was .09. For the Print Knowledge subscale, the school-level ICC was .08 and the examiner-level ICC was .00. For the Definitional Vocabulary subscale, the schoollevel ICC was .14 and the examiner-level ICC was .02. ICCs above zero indicated that multilevel modeling was necessary to account for school- and examiner-level variance. Main effect models were first examined to ensure that there were significant main effects. Interaction effects were examined for models that had significant main effects. Results of the main effects and interaction models are presented in Table 2. The Oppositional Behavior scale negatively predicted change in the Phonological Awareness subscale at Time 2, controlling for the Time 1 Phonological Awareness subscale, such that as oppositional behavior problems increased, phonological awareness scores decreased. All three externalizing behavior scales predicted the Time 2 Definitional Vocabulary subscale, controlling for the Time 1 Definitional Vocabulary subscale, such that as externalizing behavior problems increased, definitional vocabulary scores decreased. Gender moderated this relation across all three externalizing behaviors. Whereas lower externalizing behaviors were associated with higher definitional vocabulary scores across gender, this relation was stronger for girls than it was for boys. Externalizing behavior was unrelated to changes in print knowledge.

Discussion The moderating effects of gender were chosen for this study because previous research suggested gender-specific patterns of associations between externalizing behaviors and emergent literacy skills (e.g., Doctoroff et al., 2006; Stowe et al., 1999). The identification of children at risk of emergent literacy deficits will be aided if behavioral precursors for at-risk boys and girls can be found. In this study, gender moderated the predictive relations of inattention, H/I, and oppositional behavior on definitional vocabulary. Whereas behavior problems were predictive of emergent literacy skills for both boys and girls, the relations between the externalizing behaviors and definitional vocabulary were stronger for girls than they were for boys. Compared with girls with lower levels of externalizing behaviors, girls with higher levels of externalizing behaviors experienced lower gains in vocabulary. These findings were discrepant from those of prior studies that found stronger relations between boys’ externalizing behaviors and emergent literacy skills (e.g., Doctoroff et al., 2006; Stowe et al., 1999). The most parsimonious explanation for the differences is the examination of longitudinal relations between externalizing behaviors and emergent literacy skills. The longitudinal analyses allowed for the effects of externalizing behavior to be examined in relation to short-term changes in emergent literacy skills (i.e., emergent literacy skills not accounted for by initial levels of the same skills). Concurrent examinations of the links between externalizing behaviors and emergent literacy are limited by the fact that they do not allow the disentanglement of cause and effect. Longitudinal analyses allow for the exploration of antecedence and statistical control of previous literacy skills. Research suggests that girls and boys have different rates of biological and cognitive development (e.g., Else-Quest, Hyde, Goldsmith, & Van Hulle, 2006; Keenan & Shaw, 1997). Although there is mixed evidence regarding girls’ and boys’ academic performance in preschool, studies typically report either no differences (e.g., Matthews, Ponitz, & Morrison, 2009; Mead, 2006) or differences favoring girls (Huttenlocher et al., 1991; Justice et al., 2005). In our study, girls and boys entering preschool had similar emergent literacy scores. After 3 months, girls had higher scores in both phonological awareness and definitional vocabulary. There is also evidence that preschool girls have a higher capacity than boys to regulate their behavior (e.g., Else-Quest et al., 2006). Therefore, in general, girls may be more prepared than boys to benefit academically in preschool. This possibility suggests that, in contrast to boys, preschool girls have both more to gain and more to lose depending on their levels of exhibited externalizing behaviors. That is, because girls appear to gain more academically from their preschool experiences than do boys, the presence of externalizing behavior

Downloaded from jad.sagepub.com at NANYANG TECH UNIV LIBRARY on June 8, 2016

6

Journal of Attention Disorders XX(X)

Table 2.  Multilevel Models Testing for Moderation by Gender of Externalizing Behaviors at Time 1 and Emergent Literacy Skills at Time 2. Phonological awareness   Main effects model   Time 1 literacy  Gender  Inattention Moderation model   Time 1 literacy  Gender  Inattention   Gender × Inattention Main effects model   Time 1 literacy  Gender  Hyperactivity Moderation model   Time 1 literacy  Gender  Hyperactivity   Gender × Hyperactivity Main effects model   Time 1 literacy  Gender  Oppositional Moderation model   Time 1 literacy  Gender  Oppositional   Gender × Oppositional

Coefficient 0.56*** −3.35 −0.35

0.57*** −3.31 −0.13

Print knowledge

SE

R12

Coefficient

0.07 1.92 0.33

.35 .29 .02 .00

0.79*** −0.87 −0.30

0.07 1.92 0.11

0.54*** −3.16 −1.28**

0.07 1.88 0.40

0.55*** −3.09 −1.73* 0.67

0.07 1.88 0.69 0.84

.35 .30 .02 .00

.37 .28 .02 .03 .37 .29 .02 .02 .00

0.80*** −0.85 −0.11

0.79*** −0.92 −0.51

Definitional vocabulary

SE

R12

Coefficient

0.04 1.35 0.22

.66 .65 .00 .00

0.55*** −0.81 −0.74**

0.06 1.39 0.24

0.58*** −0.59 −1.45*** 1.16**

0.06 1.36 0.35 0.45

0.58*** −0.87 −0.19*

0.06 1.41 0.08

−0.65*** 0.59 −0.53*** 0.51**

0.06 1.37 0.13 0.16

0.56*** −0.66 −2.76***

0.06 1.39 0.30

0.58*** −0.66 −2.76*** 2.64***

0.06 1.30 0.48 0.58

0.04 1.35 0.08

0.04 1.34 0.28

.67 .65 .00 .00

.67 .65 .00 .01

SE

R12 .42 .33 .00 .07 .45 .37 .00 .12 .05 .40 .37 .00 .04 .45 .39 .00 .10 .07 .42 .35 .00 .07 .50 .40 .00 .19 .13

Note. Gender was coded as girls = 0, and boys = 1. R12 values were pseudo-R2 change statistics, which were calculated as total residual variance divided by the variance accounted for by the predictors. Time 1 Literacy = Relevant Time 1 Emergent Literacy Control variable (i.e., Time 1 Phonological Awareness was used as a control for Time 2 Phonological Awareness). Hyperactivity = Hyperactivity/Impulsivity. *p ≤ .05. **p ≤ .01. ***p ≤ .001.

problems, which inhibit skill development, has a larger effect on skill development in girls than it does in boys. The moderating effects of gender on the relation between externalizing behaviors and short-term change in vocabulary skills may be exacerbated by preschool classroom factors, specifically, the interaction between teachers and children. Vocabulary is acquired through exposure to words (Huttenlocher et al., 1991), much of which occurs in interactions with teachers for preschool children. Researchers have found that children with good teacher–child interactions acquire more vocabulary than children with more acrimonious teacher–child interactions (e.g., Burchinal, Peisner-Feinberg, Pianta, & Howes, 2002; Pianta & Stuhlman, 2004). There may be fewer opportunities for vocabulary exposure for girls who act out than for girls who behave well. Because the average well-behaved preschool

girl behaves better than the average well-behaved preschool boy (Webster-Stratton, 1996), preschool teachers may expect and tolerate a higher level of behavior problems from boys than from girls. Prior studies have reported that boys who called out answers without raising their hands were likely to be recognized in the classroom; in contrast, girls who did the same were likely to be reprimanded for their actions (Sadker & Sadker, 1985). Teachers respond less, whether positively or negatively, to girls’ aggression, compared with boys’ aggression, and they respond more negatively to girls with high activity levels than to girls with low activity levels (Fagot & Hagan, 1985; Serbin, O’Leary, Kent, & Tonick, 1973). Future research should focus on whether differences in opportunities for interaction result in differences in vocabulary acquisition between boys and girls with behavior problems.

Downloaded from jad.sagepub.com at NANYANG TECH UNIV LIBRARY on June 8, 2016

7

Allan et al.

Externalizing Behaviors Are Associated With and Predictive of Emergent Literacy Skills In this study, hypotheses regarding the specificity of externalizing behaviors with emergent literacy skills were only partially supported. Inattention did not predict short-term change in phonological awareness or print knowledge skills. Regarding prospective relations between externalizing behaviors and these decoding precursors, only oppositional behavior predicted short-term change in phonological awareness. This is in contrast to prior studies in older children that have not found associations between oppositional behavior and decoding skills (e.g., E. M. Arnold et al., 2005; Biederman et al., 2008). However, no prior studies have examined the longitudinal relation between oppositional behavior and phonological awareness in preschool children specifically. Consistent with our hypotheses, oppositional behavior predicted short-term change in definitional vocabulary skills. However, this relation was not specific as inattention and H/I also predicted short-term change in definitional vocabulary skills. The relations we reported are consistent with the results of other researchers using diagnostic criteria for ADHD or less specific externalizing behavior problems as predictor variables and emergent literacy skills that are solely or primarily comprised of language-related outcome measures (e.g., Friedman-Weieneth et al., 2007; Stowe et al., 1999). These findings suggest that externalizing behavior problems should be considered more globally when examining their impact on language skills in young children, and that the relations between externalizing behaviors and emergent literacy skills in preschool children may not be as specific as these relations are in older children.

Nonclinician Examiners Can Provide Valid Information Another important finding in our study is that nonclinician examiners’ with only limited interactions with preschool children can provide important information about the children’s externalizing behaviors. The method of rating behavior in the current study provided evidence for the predictive utility of nonclinician examiners’ ratings of preschool children. Previous researchers, using similar methods and informants who only interacted with children for 3 hr, produced ratings that correlated significantly, but modestly, with teacher ratings (Kerr et al., 2007; McConaughy et al., 2010). Whereas some researchers have suggested that discrepancies between informant ratings, even across broad contexts, represent measurement errors (e.g., Wright, Zakriski, Hartley, & Parad, 2011), it is more likely that differences between informants are context driven (Dirks et al., 2012). Although preschool children

may behave differently in a one-to-one setting with a stranger compared with in a classroom with their peers, the significant predictive utility of the externalizing behavior problems in developing emergent literacy skills in this study suggests that important information can be captured in this manner. Researchers suggest that multiple informants rating children in multiple contexts can provide the most comprehensive information regarding a child’s behavior (Dirks et al., 2012; Phillips & Lonigan, 2010). Because nonclinician examiners are already involved in data collection, there is limited additional burden associated with collecting these data. Only a single study, by Gerhardstein et al. (2003), has included research assistants in analyzing the structure of the CTRS; however, they did not consider examiner ratings independently of teacher ratings. Future studies should examine the factor structure using ratings provided from research assistants in the same context as this study as well as the incremental validity of nonclinician examiners’ ratings of behavior as compared with parent and teacher ratings of behavior.

Implications for Identification and Interventions Several authors have suggested that boys’ learning problems are more visible than girls’ learning problems because of the stronger link found for boys’ behavior problems and reading deficits than for girls’ behavior problems and reading deficits (e.g., Shaywitz, Shaywitz, Fletcher, & Escobar, 1990; Stowe et al., 2000). Although this study did not measure whether learning problems were more or less visible for boys versus girls, the results of this study do not support this hypothesis in preschool children. It appears that a relatively simple behavior screener could help in identifying behavior problems that, in turn, are associated with later emergent literacy deficits regardless of gender. An understanding of why externalizing behavior problems are differentially associated over time with boys’ and girls’ emergent literacy skills might lead to the development of behavioral screeners that are normatively developed for boys and girls separately. Children with comorbid behavior and literacy problems tend to have worse academic prognoses (McKinney, 1989), and prevention programs have proven to be more cost effective than intervention programs (Offord, 1996). Developing early identification approaches that account for gender differences may lead to increased treatment and more positive treatment outcomes.

Limitations and Conclusions There are a few limitations of this study. This study was among the first to use behavior ratings by nonclinician examiners to predict academic outcomes, suggesting that further replication is needed. Because the assessment was

Downloaded from jad.sagepub.com at NANYANG TECH UNIV LIBRARY on June 8, 2016

8

Journal of Attention Disorders XX(X)

short, examiners had limited time to observe children’s behavior, which resulted in restricted variance of the CTRS. Given that this restriction of range would attenuate predictions (e.g., Sackett & Yang, 2000), our significant findings are still informative. A bidirectional effect could not be examined in these data. However, studies in preschool and older children support unidirectional relations from externalizing behaviors to academic problems (e.g., Masten et al., 2005; Walcott, Scheemaker, & Bielski, 2010). In conclusion, the results of this study indicate that preschool externalizing behaviors are predictive of emergent literacy skills. Overall, these findings suggest that the measurement of externalizing behaviors may be a useful adjunct for identifying preschool children at risk of later academic difficulties and that the importance of different types of problem behaviors might be gender specific to some degree. There is a moderating effect of gender on the relation between externalizing behaviors and vocabulary change such that girls who are rated as having more externalizing behaviors experience less vocabulary change than do girls who are not rated as having many externalizing behaviors. These results contrast those of Doctoroff et al. (2006) and Stowe et al. (1999) who found that misbehavior was associated with boys’ emergent literacy deficits only. However, our results were longitudinal which allowed for an assessment of the impact of externalizing behaviors on short-term change in literacy skills. A tentative hypothesis for the results is that girls are generally more prepared for vocabulary acquisition, and that those who are not may be at a disadvantage because teachers might treat girls with externalizing behavior problems differently than girls who fit the more stereotypical behavior pattern for girls. Authors’ Note Views expressed herein are solely those of the authors and have not been reviewed or approved by the grantors.

Declaration of Conflicting Interests The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Funding The author(s) disclosed receipt of the following financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article: Preparation of this work was supported, in part, by Grants R305B04074 and R305B090021 from the Institute of Education Sciences and Grant HD052120 from the National Institute of Child Health and Human Development.

References Allan, D. M., Allan, N. P., Lonigan, C. J., Hume, L. E., Farrington, A. L., & Vinco, M. H. (2013). The influences of working memory and multiple informants' ratings of inattention on

emergent literacy skills growth. Manuscript submitted for publication. Arnold, D. H. (1997). Co-occurrence of externalizing behavior problems and emergent academic difficulties in young highrisk boys: A preliminary evaluation of patterns and mechanisms. Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology, 18, 317-330. Arnold, E. M., Goldston, D. B., Walsh, A. K., Reboussin, B. A., Daniel, S. S., Hickman, E., & Wood, F. B. (2005). Severity of emotional and behavioral problems among poor and typical readers. Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology, 33, 205-217. Beitchman, J. H., Wilson, B., Brownlie, E. B., Walters, H., Inglis, A., & Lancee, W. (1996). Long-term consistency in speech/ language profiles: II. Behavioral, emotional, and social outcomes. Journal of the American Academy of Child & Adolescent Psychiatry, 35, 815-825. Biederman, J., Ball, S. W., Monuteaux, M. C., Kaiser, R., & Faraone, S. V. (2008). CBCL clinical scales discriminate ADHD youth with structured-interview derived diagnosis of oppositional defiant disorder (ODD). Journal of Attention Disorders, 12, 76-82. Bonica, C., Arnold, D. H., Fisher, P. H., Zeljo, A., & Yershova, K. (2003). Relational aggression, relational victimization, and language development in preschoolers. Social Development, 12, 551-562. Burchinal, M. R., Peisner-Feinberg, E., Pianta, R., & Howes, C. (2002). Development of academic skills from preschool through second grade: Family and classroom predictors of developmental trajectories. Journal of School Psychology, 40, 415-436. Chall, J. S., Jacobs, V. A., & Baldwin, L. E. (1990). The reading crisis: Why poor children fall behind. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. Conners, C. K. (1997). Conners’ Rating Scales—Revised. North Tonawanda, NY: Multi-Health Systems Cunningham, A. E., & Stanovich, K. E. (1997). Early reading acquisition and its relation to reading experience and ability 10 years later. Developmental Psychology, 33, 934-945. Dirks, M. A., De Los Reyes, A., Briggs-Gowan, M., Cella, D., & Wakschlag, L. S. (2012). Annual Research Review: Embracing not erasing contextual variability in children’s behavior—Theory and utility in the selection and use of methods and informants in developmental psychopathology. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 53, 558-574. Doctoroff, G. L., Greer, J. A., & Arnold, D. H. (2006). The relationship between social behavior and emergent literacy among preschool boys and girls. Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology, 27, 1-13. Ehri, L. C., Nunes, S. R., Willows, D. M., Schuster, B. V., Yaghoub-Zadeh, Z., & Shanahan, T. (2001). Phonemic awareness instruction helps children learn to read: Evidence from the national reading panel’s meta-analysis. Reading Research Quarterly, 36, 250-287. Else-Quest, N. M., Hyde, J. S., Goldsmith, H. H., & Van Hulle, C. A. (2006). Gender differences in temperament: A metaanalysis. Psychological Bulletin, 132, 33-72. Fagot, B. I., & Hagan, R. (1985). Aggression in toddlers: Responses to assertive acts of boys and girls. Sex Roles, 12, 341-351.

Downloaded from jad.sagepub.com at NANYANG TECH UNIV LIBRARY on June 8, 2016

9

Allan et al. Friedman-Weieneth, J. L., Harvey, E. A., Youngwirth, S. D., & Goldstein, L. H. (2007). The relation between 3-year-old children’s skills and their hyperactivity, inattention, and aggression. Journal of Educational Psychology, 99, 671-681. Gerhardstein, R. R., Lonigan, C. J., Cukrowicz, K. C., & McGuffey, J. A. (2003). Factor structure of the Conners’ Teacher Rating Scale-Short Form in a low-income preschool sample. Journal of Psychoeducational Assessment, 21, 223-243. Gilliam, W. S., & de Mesquita, P. B. (2000). The relationship between language and cognitive development and emotionalbehavioral problems in financially-disadvantaged preschoolers: A longitudinal investigation. Early Child Development and Care, 162, 9-24. Goyette, C. H., Conners, C. K., & Ulrich, R. F. (1978). Normative data on revised Conners Parent and Teacher Rating Scales. Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology, 6, 221-236. Huttenlocher, J., Haight, W., Bryk, A., Seltzer, M., & Lyons, T. (1991). Early vocabulary growth: Relation to language input and gender. Developmental Psychology, 27, 236-248. Justice, L. M., Invernizzi, M., Geller, K., Sullivan, A. K., & Welsch, J. (2005). Descriptive-developmental performance of at-risk preschoolers on early literacy tasks. Reading Psychology, 26, 1-25. Keenan, K., & Shaw, D. (1997). Developmental and social influences on young girls’ early problem behavior. Psychological Bulletin, 121, 95-113. Kerr, D. C. R., Lunkenheimer, E. S., & Olson, S. L. (2007). Assessment of child problem behaviors by multiple informants: A longitudinal study from preschool to school entry. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 48, 967-975. Lonigan, C. J. (2006). Development, assessment, and promotion of preliteracy skills. Early Education & Development, 17, 91-114. Lonigan, C. J., Bloomfield, B. G., Anthony, J. L., Bacon, K. D., Phillips, B. M., & Samwel, C. S. (1999). Relations among emergent literacy skills, behavior problems, and social competence in preschool children from low-and middle-income backgrounds. Topics for Early Childhood Special Education, 19, 40-53. Lonigan, C. J., Burgess, S. R., & Anthony, J. L. (2000). Development of emergent literacy and early reading skills in preschool children: Evidence from a latent-variable longitudinal study. Developmental Psychology, 36, 596-613. Lonigan, C. J., Schatschneider, C., & Westberg, L. (2008). Identification of children’s skills and abilities linked to later outcomes in reading, writing, and spelling. Developing Early Literacy: Report of the National Early Literacy Panel, 55-106. Lonigan, C. J., Wagner, R. K., Torgesen, J. K., & Rashotte, C. A. (2007). TOPEL: Test of Preschool Early Literacy. Austin, TX: Pro-Ed. Masten, A. S., Roisman, G. I., Long, J. D., Burt, K. B., Obradovic, J., Riley, J. R., . . . Tellegen, A. (2005). Developmental cascades: Linking academic achievement and externalizing and internalizing symptoms over 20 years. Developmental Psychology, 41, 733-746. Matthews, J. S., Ponitz, C. C., & Morrison, F. J. (2009). Early gender differences in self-regulation and academic achievement. Journal of Educational Psychology, 101, 689-704.

McConaughy, S. H., Harder, V. S., Antshel, K. M., Gordon, M., Eiraldi, R., & Dumenci, L. (2010). Incremental validity of test session and classroom observations in a multimethod assessment of attention deficit/hyperactivity disorder. Journal of Clinical Child and Adolescent Psychology, 39, 650-666. McGee, R., Partridge, F., Williams, S., & Silva, P. A. (1991). A twelve-year follow-up of preschool hyperactive children. Journal of the American Academy of Child & Adolescent Psychiatry, 30, 224-232. McGee, R., Prior, M., Williams, S., Smart, D., & Sanson, A. (2002). The long-term significance of teacher-rated hyperactivity and reading ability in childhood: Findings from two longitudinal studies. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 43, 1004-1017. McKinney, J. D. (1989). Longitudinal research on the behavioral characteristics of children with learning disabilities. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 22, 141-150. Mead, S. (2006, June). The truth about boys and girls. Washington, DC: Education Sector. Retrieved from http://www.educationsector.org/publications/truth-about-boys-and-girls National Center on Educational Statistics. (2011). The Nation’s Report Card: Reading 2011. National assessment of educational progress at grades 4 and 8. Retrieved from http://nces. ed.gov/nationsreportcard/pubs/main2011/2012457.asp Newcorn, J. H., Halperin, J. M., Jensen, P. S., Abikoff, H. B., Arnold, L. E., Cantwell, D. P., . . . Vitiello, B. (2001). Symptom profiles in children with ADHD: Effects of comorbidity and gender. Journal of the American Academy of Child & Adolescent Psychiatry, 40, 137-146. Offord, D. R. (1996). The state of prevention and early intervention. In R. D. Peters & R. J. McMahon (Eds.), Preventing childhood disorders, substance abuse, and delinquency (pp. 329-344). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE. Phillips, B. M., & Lonigan, C. J. (2010). Child and informant influences on behavioral ratings of preschool children. Psychology in the Schools, 47, 374-390. Pianta, R., & Stuhlman, M. (2004). Teacher-child relationships and children’s success in the first year of school. School Psychology Review, 33, 444-458. Piel, J. A. (1990). Unmasking sex and social class differences in childhood aggression: The case for language maturity. Journal of Educational Research, 84, 100-106. Rabiner, D., & Coie, J. D. (2000). Early attention problems and children’s reading achievement: A longitudinal investigation. Journal of the American Academy of Child & Adolescent Psychiatry, 39, 859-867. Raudenbush, S. W., Bryk, A. S., Cheong, Y. F., Congdon, R. T., & du Toit, M. (2011). HLM 7: Hierarchical linear and nonlinear modeling. Chicago, IL: Scientific Software International. Sackett, P. R., & Yang, H. (2000). Correction for range restriction: An expanded typology. Journal of Applied Psychology, 85, 112-118. Sadker, M., & Sadker, D. (1985). Sexism in the schoolroom of the ‘80s. Psychology Today, 19, 54-57. Serbin, L. A., O’Leary, K. D., Kent, R. N., & Tonick, I. J. (1973). A comparison of teacher response to the preacademic and problem behavior of boys and girls. Child Development, 44, 796-804.

Downloaded from jad.sagepub.com at NANYANG TECH UNIV LIBRARY on June 8, 2016

10

Journal of Attention Disorders XX(X)

Shaywitz, S. E., Shaywitz, B. A., Fletcher, J. M., & Escobar, M. D. (1990). Prevalence of reading disability in boys and girls: Results of the Connecticut Longitudinal Study. Journal of the American Medical Association, 264, 998-1002. Sims, D. M., & Lonigan, C. J. (2013). Inattention, hyperactivity, and emergent literacy: Different facets of inattention relate uniquely to preschoolers’ reading-related skills. Journal of Clinical Child & Adolescent Psychology, 42, 208-219. Sonuga-Barke, E. J. S., Lamparelli, M., Stevenson, J., Thompson, M., & Henry, A. (1994). Pre-school behaviour problems and intellectual attainment: The associations of hyperactivity and conduct problems. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 35, 949-960. Spira, E. G., Bracken, S. S., & Fischel, J. E. (2005). Predicting improvement after first-grade reading difficulties: The effects of oral language, emergent literacy, and behavior skills. Developmental Psychology, 41, 225-234. Spreen, O. (1988). Prognosis of learning disability. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 56, 836-842. Stanovich, K. E. (1986). Matthew effects in reading: Some consequences of individual differences in the acquisition of literacy. Reading Research Quarterly, 21, 360-407. Stone, W. L., & La Greca, A. M. (1990). The social status of children with learning disabilities: A reexamination. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 23, 32-37. Storch, S. A., & Whitehurst, G. J. (2002). Oral language and code-related precursors to reading: Evidence from a longitudinal structural model. Developmental Psychology, 38, 934-947. Stowe, R. M., Arnold, D. H., & Ortiz, C. (1999). Gender differences in the relationship of language development to disruptive behavior and peer relationships in preschoolers. Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology, 20, 521-536. Teale, W. H., & Sulzby, E. (1986). Emergent literacy as a perspective for examining how young children become writers and readers. In W. H. Teale & E. Sulzby (Eds.), Emergent literacy: Writing and reading (pp. vii-xxv). Norwood, NJ: Ablex. Walcott, C. M., Scheemaker, A., & Bielski, K. (2010). A longitudinal investigation of inattention and preliteracy development. Journal of Attention Disorders, 14, 79-85.

Webster-Stratton, C. (1996). Early onset conduct problems: Does gender make a difference? Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 64, 540-551. Whitehurst, G. J., & Lonigan, C. J. (1998). Child development and emergent literacy. Child Development, 69, 848-872. Willcutt, E. G., Hartung, C., Lahey, B. B., Loney, J., & Pelham, W. E. (1999). Utility of behavior ratings by examiners during assessments of preschool children with attentiondeficit/hyperactivity disorder. Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology, 27, 463-472. Willoughby, M., Kupersmidt, J., Voegler-Lee, M., & Bryant, D. (2011). Contributions of hot and cool self-regulation to preschool disruptive behavior and academic achievement. Developmental Neuropsychology, 36, 162-180. Winsler, A., & Wallace, G. L. (2002). Behavior problems and social skills in preschool children: Parent-teacher agreement and relations with classroom observations. Early Education & Development, 13, 41-58. Wright, J. C., Zakriski, A. L., Hartley, A. G., & Parad, H. W. (2011). Reassessing the assessment of change in at-risk youth: Conflict and coherence in overall versus contextual assessments of behavior. Journal of Psychopathology and Behavioral Assessment, 33, 215-227.

Author Biographies Nicholas P. Allan, MS, is a graduate student in the Psychology department at Florida State University. His research interests include temperamental and behavioral factors associated with development. Shauna W. Joye, PhD, is an assistant professor of psychology at Georgia Southern University. Her early research and clinical work focused on early childhood learning, attention disorders, temperament, and autism spectrum disorder, with an emphasis on measurement of these constructs. Currently, she examines clinical interventions to enhance self-control, including empirical research on mindfulness. Christopher J. Lonigan, PhD, is a distinguished research professor of psychology and an associate director of the Florida Center for Reading Research at Florida State University. His research interests include the development, assessment, and promotion of preschool early literacy skills and self-regulation.

Downloaded from jad.sagepub.com at NANYANG TECH UNIV LIBRARY on June 8, 2016