Hostname: page-component-55f67697df-twqc4 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-05-10T09:15:57.304Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Rethinking evidence-based practice and two-generation programs to create the future of early childhood policy

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  17 December 2013

Jack P. Shonkoff  and
Philip A. Fisher
Jack P. Shonkoff*
Affiliation:
Harvard University
Philip A. Fisher
Affiliation:
University of Oregon
*
Address correspondence and reprint requests to: Jack P. Shonkoff, Center on the Developing Child, Harvard University, 50 Church Street, Cambridge, MA 02138; E-mail: [email protected].
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Half a century of research and program evaluation has fueled a diverse landscape of early childhood policies and practices that produce a range of positive effects on the life prospects of children who face the burdens of significant adversity. Drawing on advances in neurobiology, developmental psychology, developmental psychopathology, and prevention science, this paper presents a framework for elucidating underlying causal mechanisms that explain differences in outcomes, formulating enhanced theories of change about how to shift developmental trajectories, designing creative interventions and rethinking the concept of a two-generation strategy to produce breakthrough impacts, and launching a new era of investment in young children and their families that will achieve greater reductions in intergenerational disparities in learning, behavior, and health than those produced by current best practices. Particular attention is focused on the hypothesis that substantially better outcomes for vulnerable, young children could be achieved by greater attention to strengthening the resources and capabilities of the adults who care for them rather than by continuing to focus primarily on the provision of child-focused enrichment, parenting education, and informal support. Central to achieving this goal is the need to establish an innovation-friendly environment that embraces fast-cycle sharing, supports risk taking, and celebrates learning from failure.

Type
Regular Articles
Information
Development and Psychopathology , Volume 25 , Issue 4pt2: Development and Psychopathology: A Vision Realized , November 2013 , pp. 1635 - 1653
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2013 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

Almas, A. N., Degnan, K. A., Radulescu, A., Nelson, C. A. III, Zeanah, C. H., & Fox, N. A. (2012). Effects of early intervention and the moderating effects of brain activity on institutionalized children's social skills at age 8. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 109, 17228–17231.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Anderson, D. E., Vogel, E. K., & Awh, E. (2011). Precision in visual working memory reaches a stable plateau when individual item limits are exceeded. Journal of Neuroscience, 31, 1128–1138.Google Scholar
Astuto, J., & Allen, L. (2009). Home visitation and young children: An approach worth investing in? Society for Research in Child Development, 23, 3–21.Google Scholar
Awh, E., & Vogel, E. K. (2008). The bouncer in the brain. Nature Neuroscience, 11, 5–6.Google Scholar
Barnett, W. S. (1985). Benefit–cost analysis of the Perry Preschool Program and its policy implications. Educational Evaluation & Policy Analysis, 7, 333–342.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Barnett, W. S. (1993). Benefit–cost analysis of preschool education: Findings from a 25-year follow-up. American Journal of Orthopsychiatry, 63, 500–508.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Barnett, W. S. (1996). Lives in the balance: Age-27 benefit–cost analysis of the High/Scope Perry Preschool Program (Monographs of the High/Scope Educational Research Foundation, Number 11). Ypsilanti, MI: High/Scope Press.Google Scholar
Barnett, W. S., Jung, K., Yarosz, D. J., Thomas, J., Hornbeck, A., Stechuk, R., et al. (2008). Educational effects of the Tools of the Mind curriculum: A randomized trial. Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 23, 299–313.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Barnett, W. S., & Masse, L. N. (2007). Comparative benefit–cost analysis of the Abecedarian program and its policy implications. Economics of Education Review, 26, 113–125.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bastian, C. C., Langer, N., Jäncke, L., & Oberauer, K. (2012). Effects of working memory training in young and old adults. Memory & Cognition, 41, 611–624.Google Scholar
Beatty, B. (2012). The debate over the young “disadvantaged child”: Preschool intervention, developmental psychology, and compensatory education in the 1960s and early 1970s. Teachers College Record, 114(6), 1–36.Google Scholar
Belfield, C. R., Nores, M., Barnett, W. S., & Schweinhart, L. (2006). The High/Scope Perry Preschool Program: Cost–benefit analysis using data from the age-40 followup. Journal of Human Resources, 41, 162–190.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Benzies, K., Edwards, N., Tough, S., Nagan, K., Mychasiuk, R., Keown, L.-A., et al. (2011). Effects of a two-generation preschool programme on receptive language skill in low-income Canadian children. Early Child Development & Care, 181, 397–412.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Berrueta-Clement, J. R., Schweinhart, L. J., Barnett, W. S., Epstein, A. S., & Weikart, D. P. (1984). Changed lives: The effects of the Perry Preschool Program on youths through age 19. (Monographs of the High/Scope Educational Research Foundation, Number 8). Ypsilanti, MI: High/Scope Press.Google Scholar
Best, J. R., & Miller, P. H. (2010). A developmental perspective on executive function. Child Development, 81, 1641–1660.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bierman, K. L., Coie, J. D., Dodge, K. A., Greenberg, M. T., Lochman, J. E., McMahon, R. J., et al. (2010). The effects of a multiyear universal social–emotional learning program: The role of student and school characteristics. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 78, 156–168.Google Scholar
Bierman, K. L., Nix, R. L., Greenberg, M. T., Blair, C., & Domitrovich, C. E. (2008). Executive functions and school readiness intervention: Impact, moderation, and mediation in the Head Start REDI program. Development and Psychopathology, 20, 821–843.Google Scholar
Blair, C. (1999). Science, policy, and early intervention. Intelligence, 27, 93–110.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Blair, C. (2002). School readiness: Integrating cognition and emotion in a neurobiological conceptualization of children's functioning at school entry. American Psychologist, 57, 111–127.Google Scholar
Blair, C. (2010). Stress and the development of self-regulation in context. Child Development Perspectives, 3, 181–188.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Blair, C., & Raver, C. C. (2012). Child development in the context of adversity: Experiential canalization of brain and behavior. American Psychologist, 67, 309–318.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bodrova, E., & Leong, D. J. (2009). Tools of the mind: A Vygotskian-based early childhood curriculum. Early Childhood Services, 3, 245–262.Google Scholar
Bradley, R. H., & Corwyn, R.F. (2002). Socioeconomic status and child development. Annual Review of Psychology, 53, 371–399.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Brand, S. R., & Brennan, P. A. (2009). Impact of antenatal and postpartum maternal mental illness: How are the children? Clinical Obstetrics & Gynecology, 52, 441–455.Google Scholar
Brehmer, Y., Westerberg, H., & Bäckman, L. (2012). Working-memory training in younger and older adults: Training gains, transfer, and maintenance. Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, 6, 63.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bronfenbrenner, U. (1979). The ecology of human development: Experiments by nature and design. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Brooks-Gunn, J., Berlin, L. J., & Fuligni, A. S. (2000). Early childhood intervention programs: What about the family? In Shonkoff, J. P. & Meisels, S. J. (Eds.), Handbook of early childhood intervention (2nd ed., pp. 549–588). New York: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brooks-Gunn, J., Duncan, G. J., & Aber, J. L. (Eds.). (1997). Neighborhood poverty: Context and consequences for children: Policy implications in studying neighborhoods. New York: Russell Sage Foundation Press.Google Scholar
Brotman, L. M., Gouley, K. K., Huang, K. Y., Kamboukos, D., Fratto, C., & Pine, D. S. (2007). Effects of a psychosocial family-based preventive intervention on cortisol response to a social challenge in preschoolers at high risk for antisocial behavior. Archives of General Psychiatry, 64, 1172–1179.Google Scholar
Bruce, J., McDermott, J. M., Fisher, P. A., & Fox, N. A. (2009). Using behavioral and electrophysiological measures to assess the effects of a preventive intervention: A preliminary study with preschool-aged foster children. Prevention Science, 10, 129–140.Google Scholar
Bryck, R. L., & Fisher, P. A. (2012). Training the brain: Practical applications of neural plasticity from the intersection of cognitive neuroscience, developmental psychology, and prevention science. American Psychologist, 67, 87–100.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Campbell, F. A., Helms, R., Sparling, J., & Ramey, C. T. (1998). Early-childhood programs and success in school: The Abecedarian Study. In Barnett, W. S. & Booncock, S. S. (Eds.), Early care and education for children in poverty: Promises, programs, and long-term results (pp. 145–166). Albany, NY: State University of New York Press.Google Scholar
Campbell, F. A., Pungello, E. P., Burchinal, M., Kainz, K., Pan, Y., Wasik, B. H., et al. (2012). Adult outcomes as a function of an early childhood educational program: An Abecedarian Project follow-up. Developmental Psychology, 48, 1033–1043.Google Scholar
Campbell, F. A., & Ramey, C. T. (2010). Carolina Abecedarian Project. In Reynolds, A. J., Rolnick, A. J., Englund, M. M., & Temple, J. A. (Eds.), Childhood programs and practices in the first decade of life: A human capital integration (pp. 76–98). New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Campbell, F. A., Ramey, C. T., Pungello, E. P., Sparling, J., & Miller-Johnson, S. (2002). Early childhood education: Young adult outcomes from the Abecedarian Project. Applied Developmental Science, 6, 42–57.Google Scholar
Center on the Developing Child at Harvard University. (2007). A science-based framework for early childhood policy: Using evidence to improve outcomes in learning, behavior, and health for vulnerable children. Cambridge, MA: Author.Google Scholar
Center on the Developing Child at Harvard University. (2010). The foundations of lifelong health are built in early childhood. Cambridge, MA: Author.Google Scholar
Cicchetti, D. (1990). A historical perspective on the discipline of developmental psychopathology. In Rolf, J. E., Masten, A. S., Cicchetti, D., Nuechterlein, K. H. & Weintraub, S. (Eds.). Risk and protective factors in the development of psychopathology (pp. 2–28). New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Cicchetti, D., & Posner, M. I. (2005). Editorial: Cognitive and affective neuroscience and developmental psychopathology. Development and Psychopathology, 17, 569–575.Google Scholar
Cicchetti, D., Rogosch, F. A., & Toth, S. L. (2000). The efficacy of toddler–parent psychotherapy for fostering cognitive development in offspring of depressed mothers. Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology, 28, 135–148.Google Scholar
Cicchetti, D., Rogosch, F. A., & Toth, S. L. (2006). Fostering secure attachment in infants in maltreating families through preventive interventions. Development and Psychopathology, 18, 623–649.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Cicchetti, D., Rogosch, F. A., Toth, S. L., & Sturge-Apple, M. L. (2011). Normalizing the development of cortisol regulation in maltreated infants through preventive interventions. Development and Psychopathology, 23, 789–800.Google Scholar
Cicchetti, D., & Toth, S. L. (1997). Transactional ecological systems in developmental psychopathology. In Luthar, S. S., Burack, J. A., Cicchetti, D., & Weisz, J. R. (Eds.), Developmental psychopathology: Perspectives on adjustment, risk, and disorder (pp. 317–349). New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Connell, A. M., Dishion, T. J., Yasui, M., & Kavanagh, K. (2007). An adaptive approach to family intervention: Linking engagement in family-centered intervention to reductions in adolescent problem behavior. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 75, 568–579.Google Scholar
Diamond, A., Barnett, W. S., Thomas, J., & Munro, S. (2007). Preschool program improves cognitive control. Science, 318, 1387–1388.Google Scholar
Diamond, A., & Lee, K. (2011). Interventions shown to aid executive function development in children 4 to 12 years old. Science, 333, 959–964.Google Scholar
Dishion, T. J., Patterson, G. R., & Kavanagh, K. (1992). An experimental test of the coercion model: Linking theory, measurement, and intervention. In McCord, J. & Tremblay, R. (Eds.), The interaction of theory and practice: Experimental studies of intervention (pp. 253–282). New York: Guilford Press.Google Scholar
Dozier, M. (2003). Attachment-based treatment for vulnerable children. Attachment & Human Development, 5, 253–257.Google Scholar
Dozier, M., Albus, K., Fisher, P. A., & Sepulveda, S. (2002). Interventions for foster parents: Implications for developmental theory. Development and Psychopathology, 14, 843–860.Google Scholar
Dozier, M., Higley, E., Albus, K. E., & Nutter, A. (2002). Intervening with foster infants' caregivers: Targeting three critical needs. Infant Mental Health Journal, 23, 541–554.Google Scholar
Dozier, M., Lindhiem, O., & Ackerman, J. P. (2005). Attachment and biobehavioral catch-up: An intervention targeting empirically identified needs of foster infants. In Berlin, L. J., Ziv, Y., Amaya-Jackson, L., & Greenberg, M. T. (Eds.), Enhancing early attachments: Theory, research, intervention, and policy (pp. 178–194). New York: Guilford Press.Google Scholar
Dozier, M., Lindhiem, O., Lewis, E., Bick, J., Bernard, K., & Peloso, E. (2009). Effects of a foster parent training program on young children's attachment behaviors: Preliminary evidence from a randomized clinical trial. Child & Adolescent Social Work Journal, 26, 321–332.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Duncan, G., Morris, P., & Rodrigues, C. (2011). Does money really matter? Estimating impacts of family income on young children's achievement with data from random-assignment experiments. Developmental Psychology, 47, 1263–1279.Google Scholar
Elliott, J. G., Gathercole, S. E., Alloway, T. P., Holmes, J., & Kirkwood, H. (2010). An evaluation of a classroom-based intervention to help overcome working memory difficulties and improve long-term academic achievement. Journal of Cognitive Education & Psychology, 9, 227–250.Google Scholar
Elliott, S. N., Huai, N., & Roach, A. T. (2007). Universal and early screening for educational difficulties: Current and future approaches. Journal of School Psychology, 45, 137–161.Google Scholar
Ellis, B. J., & Boyce, W. T. (2011). Differential susceptibility to the environment: Toward an understanding of sensitivity to developmental experiences and context. Development and Psychopathology, 23, 1–5.Google Scholar
Emde, R. N., & Robinson, J. L. (2000). Guiding principles for a theory of early intervention: A developmental–psychoanalytic perspective. In Shonkoff, J. P. & Meisels, S. J. (Eds.), Handbook of early intervention (pp. 160–178). New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Ester, E. F., Serences, J. T., & Awh, E. (2009). Spatially global representations in human primary visual cortex during working memory maintenance. Journal of Neuroscience, 29, 15258–15265.Google Scholar
Evans, G. W., & Kim, P. (2013). Childhood poverty, chronic stress, self-regulation, and coping. Child Development Perspectives, 7(1), 43–48.Google Scholar
Farran, D. C. (2000). Another decade of intervention for children who are low income or disabled: What do we know now? In Shonkoff, J. P. & Meisels, S. J. (Eds.), Handbook of early childhood intervention (2nd ed., pp. 510–548). New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Fishbein, D. (2000). The importance of neurobiological research to the prevention of psychopathology. Prevention Science, 1, 89–106.Google Scholar
Fishbein, D., Hyde, C., Coe, B., & Paschall, M. J. (2004). Neurocognitive and physiological prerequisites for prevention of adolescent drug abuse. Journal of Primary Prevention, 24, 471–495.Google Scholar
Fisher, P. A., & Kim, H. K. (2007). Intervention effects on foster preschoolers' attachment-related behaviors from a randomized trial. Prevention Science, 8, 161–170.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Fisher, P. A., Lester, B. M., DeGarmo, D. S., LaGasse, L. L., Lin, H., Shankaran, S., et al. (2011). The combined effects of prenatal drug exposure and early adversity on neurobehavioral disinhibition in childhood and adolescence. Development and Psychopathology, 23, 777–788.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Fisher, P. A., & Stoolmiller, M. (2008). Intervention effects on foster parent stress: Associations with child cortisol levels. Development and Psychopathology, 20, 1003–1021.Google Scholar
Fisher, P. A., Stoolmiller, M., Gunnar, M. R., & Burraston, B. (2007). Effects of a therapeutic intervention for foster preschoolers on diurnal cortisol activity. Psychoneuroendocrinology, 32, 892–905.Google Scholar
Fisher, P. A., Stoolmiller, M., Mannering, A. M., & Chamberlain, P. (2011). RCT intervention effects on foster placement disruptions associated with problem behavior. Journal of Consulting & Clinical Psychology, 79, 481–487.Google Scholar
Fisher, P. A., Van Ryzin, M. J., & Gunnar, M. R. (2011). Mitigating HPA axis dysregulation associated with placement changes in foster care. Psychoneuroendocrinology, 36, 531–539.Google Scholar
Ford, R. M., McDougall, S. J. P., & Evans, D. (2009). Parent-delivered compensatory education for children at risk of educational failure: Improving the academic and self-regulatory skills of a Sure Start preschool sample. British Journal of Psychology, 100, 773–797.Google Scholar
Fox, S. E., Levitt, P., & Nelson, C. A. (2010). How the timing and quality of early experiences influence the development of brain architecture. Child Development, 81, 28–40.Google Scholar
Fukuda, K., Awh, E., & Vogel, E. K. (2010). Discrete capacity limits in visual working memory. Current Opinion in Neurobiology, 20, 177–182.Google Scholar
Fuller, B. (2009). Universal preschool: Developmentalists enter the fray. Human Development, 52, 163–164.Google Scholar
Garcia Coll, C., Lamberty, G., Jenkins, R., McAdoo, H. P., Crnic, K., Wasik, B. H., et al. (1996). An integrative model for the study of developmental competencies in minority children. Child Development, 67, 1891–1914.Google Scholar
Garmezy, N., & Rutter, M. (1983). Stress, coping, and development in children. New York: McGraw–Hill.Google Scholar
Garner, A. S., Shonkoff, J. P., & Committee on Psychosocial Aspects of Child and Family Health, Committee on Early Childhood, Adoption, and Dependent Care, Section on Developmental and Behavioral Pediatrics. (2012). Early childhood adversity, toxic stress, and the role of the pediatrician: Translating developmental science into lifelong health. Pediatrics, 129, e224–e231.Google Scholar
Ghosh Ippen, C., Harris, W. W., Van Horn, P., & Lieberman, A. F. (2011). Traumatic and stressful events in early childhood: Can treatment help those at highest risk? Child Abuse & Neglect, 35, 504–513.Google Scholar
Glasgow, R. E., Lichtenstein, E., & Marcus, A. C. (2003). Why don't we see more translation of health promotion research to practice? Rethinking the efficacy-to-effectiveness transition. American Journal of Public Health, 93, 1261–1267.Google Scholar
Goodson, B. D., Layzer, J. I., St. Pierre, R. G., Bernstein, L. S., & Lopez, M. (2000). Effectiveness of a comprehensive, five-year family support program for low-income children and their families: Findings from the comprehensive child development program. Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 15, 5–39.Google Scholar
Greenberg, M. T. (2004). Current and future challenges in school-based prevention: The researcher perspective. Prevention Science, 5, 5–13.Google Scholar
Grossman, J. B., & Hollis, B. (1995). The potential of two-generation interventions: An employment and training perspective. In Smith, S. (Ed.), Two generation programs for families in poverty: A new intervention strategy (pp. 229–249). Westport, CT: Ablex.Google Scholar
Gunnar, M. R. (2000). Early adversity and the development of stress reactivity and regulation. In Nelson, C. A. (Ed.), The Minnesota symposia on child psychology: Vol. 31. The effects of early adversity on neurobehavioral development (pp. 163–200). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Gunnar, M. R., & Fisher, P. A. (2006). Bringing basic research on early experience and stress neurobiology to bear on preventive interventions for neglected and maltreated children. Development and Psychopathology, 18, 651–677.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Gunnar, M. R., & Vazquez, D. (2006). Stress neurobiology and developmental psychopathology. Cohen, D. J. (Ed.), Developmental psychopathology: Vol. 2. Developmental neuroscience (2nd ed., pp. 533–577). Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.Google Scholar
Haager, D., Klingner, J., & Vaughn, S. (Eds.). (2007). Evidence-based reading practices for response to intervention. Baltimore, MD: Brookes.Google Scholar
Halpern, R. (2000). Early intervention for low-income children and families. In Shonkoff, J. P. & Meisels, S. J. (Eds.), Handbook of early childhood intervention (2nd ed., pp. 361–386). New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Hamre, B. K., Pianta, R. C., Mashburn, A. J., & Downer, J. T. (2012). Promoting young children's social competence through the preschool PATHS curriculum and MyTeachingPartner professional development resources. Early Education & Development, 23, 809–832.Google Scholar
Hardy, K. K., Willard, V. W., & Bonner, M. J. (2011). Computerized cognitive training in survivors of childhood cancer: A pilot study. Journal of Pediatric Oncology Nursing, 28, 27–33.Google Scholar
Hart, B., & Risley, T. R. (1995). Meaningful differences in the everyday experience of young American children. Baltimore, MD: Brookes.Google Scholar
Heckman, J. J. (2006). Skill formation and the economics of investing in disadvantaged children. Science, 312, 1900–1902.Google Scholar
Heckman, J. J., Moon, S. H., Pinto, R., Savelyev, P. A., & Yavitz, A. Q. (2010). The rate of the return to the High/Scope Perry Preschool Program. Journal of Public Economics, 94, 114–128.Google Scholar
Herr, T., Halpern, R., & Majeske, R. (1995). Bridging the worlds of Head Start and welfare-to-work: Building a two-generation self-sufficiency program from the ground up. In Smith, S. (Ed.), Two generation programs for families in poverty: A new intervention strategy (pp. 161–197). Westport, CT: Ablex.Google Scholar
Howard, K., & Brooks-Gunn, J. (2009). The role of home visiting programs in preventing child abuse and neglect. Future of Children, 19, 119–146.Google Scholar
Jolles, D. D., van Buchem, M. A., Rombouts, S. A., & Crone, E. A. (2012). Practice effects in the developing brain: A pilot study. Developmental Cognitive Neuroscience, 2, S180–S191.Google Scholar
Justice, L. M., & Pullen, P. C. (2003). Promising interventions for promoting emergent literacy skills: Three evidence-based approaches. Topics in Early Childhood Special Education, 23, 99–113.Google Scholar
Karbach, J., & Kray, J. (2009). How useful is executive control training? Age differences in near and far transfer of task-switching training. Developmental Science, 12, 978–990.Google Scholar
Karoly, L., Kilburn, M., & Cannon, J. (2005). Early childhood interventions: Proven results, future promise. Santa Monica, CA: RAND.Google Scholar
Klingner, J. K., Artiles, A. J., Kozleski, E., Harry, B., Zion, S., Tate, W., et al. (2005). Addressing the disproportionate representation of culturally and linguistically diverse students in special education through culturally responsive educational systems. Education Policy Analysis Archives, 13. Accessed February 19, 2013, from http://epaa.asu.edu/ojs/article/view/143/269Google Scholar
Knudsen, E., Heckman, J., Cameron, J., & Shonkoff, J. (2006). Economic, neurobiological, and behavioral perspectives on building America's future workforce. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 103, 10155–62.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Lester, B. M., Lin, H., Degarmo, D. S., Fisher, P. A., Lagasse, L. L., Levine, T. P., et al. (2012). Neurobehavioral disinhibition predicts initiation of substance use in children with prenatal cocaine exposure. Drug & Alcohol Dependence, 126, 80–86.Google Scholar
Leve, L. D., Fisher, P. A., & Chamberlain, P. (2009). Multidimensional Treatment Foster Care as a preventive intervention to promote resiliency among youth in the child welfare system. Journal of Personality, 77, 1869–1902.Google Scholar
Lewis-Morrarty, E., Dozier, M., Bernard, K., Terracciano, S. M., & Moore, S. V. (2012). Cognitive flexibility and theory of mind outcomes among foster children: Preschool follow-up results of a randomized clinical trial. Journal of Adolescent Health, 51, S17–S22.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Lieberman, A. F., Ghosh Ippen, C., & Van Horn, P. (2006). Child–parent psychotherapy: 6-month follow-up of a randomized controlled trial. Journal of the American Academy of Child & Adolescent Psychiatry, 45, 913–918.Google Scholar
Luecken, L. J., Hagan, M. J., Sandler, I. N., Tein, J. Y., Ayers, T. S., & Wolchik, S. A. (2010). Cortisol levels six-years after participation in the family bereavement program. Psychoneuroendocrinology, 35, 785–789.Google Scholar
Lupien, S. J., McEwen, B. S., Gunnar, M. R., & Heim, C. (2009). Effects of stress throughout the lifespan on the brain, behavior, and cognition. Nature Reviews Neuroscience, 10, 434–445.Google Scholar
Maag, J. W., & Katsiyannis, A. (2010). Early intervention programs for children with behavior problems and at risk for developing antisocial behaviors: Evidence- and research-based practices. Remedial & Special Education, 31, 464–475.Google Scholar
Magnuson, K., & Shager, H. (2010). Early education: Progress and promise for children from low-income families. Children & Youth Services Review, 32, 1186–1198.Google Scholar
Marchand, E., Stice, E., Rohde, P., & Becker, C. B. (2011). Moving from efficacy to effectiveness trials in prevention research. Behaviour Research and Therapy, 49, 32–41.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Meaney, M. J. (2010). Epigenetics and the biological definition of gene × environment interactions. Child Development, 81, 41–79.Google Scholar
Melby-Lervåg, M., & Hulme, C. (2012). Is working memory training effective? A meta-analytic review. Developmental Psychology, 49, 270–291.Google Scholar
Miller, G. E., & Chen, E. (2013). The biological residue of childhood poverty. Child Development Perspectives. Advance online publication.Google Scholar
Muennig, P., Robertson, D., Johnson, G., Campbell, F., Pungello, E. P., & Neidell, M. (2011). The effect of an early education program on adult health: The Carolina Abecedarian Project randomized controlled trial. American Journal of Public Health, 101, 512–516.Google Scholar
National Scientific Council on the Developing Child. (2005). Excessive stress disrupts the architecture of the developing brain: Working paper no. 3. Accessed February 19, 2013, from http://www.developingchild.harvard.eduGoogle Scholar
Nores, M., Belfield, C. R., Barnett, W. S., & Schweinhart, L. (2005). Updating the economic impacts of the High/Scope Perry Preschool Program. Educational Evaluation & Policy Analysis, 27, 245–261.Google Scholar
Nylen, K. J., Moran, T. E., Franklin, C. L., & O'Hara, M. W. (2006). Maternal depression: A review of relevant treatment approaches for mothers and infants. Infant Mental Health Journal, 27, 327–343.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Obradovic, J., Bush, N. R., Stamperdahl, J., Adler, N. E., & Boyce, W. T. (2010). Biological sensitivity to context: The interactive effects of stress reactivity and family adversity on socioemotional behavior and school readiness. Child Development, 81, 270–289.Google Scholar
Olds, D., Eckenrode, J., Henderson, C., Kitzman, H., Cole, R., Luckey, D., et al. (2009). Preventing child abuse and neglect with home visiting by nurses. In Dodge, K. & Coleman, D. L. (Eds.), Preventing child maltreatment (pp. 29–54). New York: Guilford Press.Google Scholar
Olds, D. L, Hill, P. L., O'Brien, R., Racine, D., & Moritz, P. (2003). Taking preventive intervention to scale: The Nurse-Family Partnership. Cognitive & Behavioral Practice, 10, 278–290.Google Scholar
Olesen, P. J., Westerberg, H., & Klingberg, T. (2004). Increased prefrontal and parietal activity after training of working memory. Nature Neuroscience, 7, 75–79.Google Scholar
Patterson, G. R. (2002). The early developmental of coercive family process. In Reid, J. B., Patterson, G. R., & Snyder, J. (Eds.), Antisocial behavior in children and adolescents: Developmental theories and models for intervention (pp. 25–44). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.Google Scholar
Patterson, G. R., & Fisher, P. A. (2002). Recent developments in our understanding of parenting: Bidirectional effects, causal models, and the search for parsimony. In Bornstein, M. (Ed.), Handbook of parenting: Practical and applied parenting (2nd ed., Vol. 5, pp. 59–88). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Pears, K. C., Fisher, P. A., & Bronz, K. D. (2007). An intervention to promote social emotional school readiness in foster children: Preliminary outcomes from a pilot study. School Psychology Review, 36, 665–673.Google Scholar
Pears, K. C., Kim, H. K., & Fisher, P. A. (2012). Effects of a school readiness intervention for children in foster care on oppositional and aggressive behaviors in kindergarten. Children and Youth Services Review, 34, 2361–2366.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Rabiner, D. L., Murray, D. W., Skinner, A. T., & Malone, P. S. (2010). A randomized trial of two promising computer-based interventions for students with attention difficulties. Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology, 38, 131–142.Google Scholar
Radner, J., & Shonkoff, J. (2012). Mobilizing science to reduce intergenerational poverty. In Andrews, N. O., Erickson, D. J., Galloway, I. J., & Seidman, E. S. (Eds.), Investing in what works for America's communities: Essays on people, place & purpose (pp. 338–350). San Francisco, CA: Federal Reserve Bank of San Francisco and the Low Income Investment Fund.Google Scholar
Raikes, H. H., & Emde, R. (2006). Early Head Start: A bold new program for low-income infants and toddlers. In Watt, N. F., Ayoub, C., Bradley, R. H., Puma, J. E., & LeBoeuf, W. A. (Eds.), The crisis in youth mental health: Critical issues and effective programs (Vol. 4, pp. 181–206). Westport, CT: Praeger.Google Scholar
Ramey, C. T., & Campbell, F. A. (1984). Preventive education for high-risk children: Cognitive consequences of the Carolina Abecedarian Project. American Journal of Mental Deficiency, 88, 515–523.Google Scholar
Ramey, C. T., Ramey, S. L., Gaines, K. R., & Blair, C. (1995). Two-generation early intervention programs: A child development perspective. In Smith, S. (Ed.), Two generation programs for families in poverty: A new intervention strategy (pp. 199–228). Westport, CT: Ablex.Google Scholar
Raver, C. C. (2012). Low-income children's self-regulation in the classroom: Scientific inquiry for social change. American Psychologist, 67, 681–689.Google Scholar
Raver, C. C., Blackburn, E. K., Bancroft, M., & Torp, N. (1999). Relations between effective emotional self-regulation, attentional control, and low-income preschoolers' social competence with peers. Early Education & Development, 10, 333–350.Google Scholar
Raver, C. C., Jones, S. M., Li-Grining, C. P., Metzger, M., Champion, K. M., & Sardin, L. (2008). Improving preschool classroom processes: Preliminary findings from a randomized trial implemented in Head Start settings. Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 23, 10–26.Google Scholar
Raver, C. C., Jones, S. M., Li-Grining, C., Zhai, F., Metzger, M. W., & Solomon, B. (2009). Targeting children's behavior problems in preschool classrooms: A cluster-randomized controlled trial. Journal of Consulting & Clinical Psychology, 77, 302–316.Google Scholar
Raver, C. C., Jones, S. M., Li-Grining, C., Zhai, F., Bub, K., & Pressler, E. (2011). CRSP's impact on low-income preschoolers' preacademic skills: Self-regulation as a mediating mechanism. Child Development, 82, 362–378.Google Scholar
Reid, M. J., & Webster-Stratton, C. (2001). The Incredible Years parent, teacher, and child intervention: Targeting multiple areas of risk for a young child with pervasive conduct problems using a flexible, manualized treatment program. Cognitive & Behavioral Practice, 8, 377–386.Google Scholar
Reid, M. J., Webster-Stratton, C., & Hammond, M. (2003). Follow-up of children who received the Incredible Years Intervention for oppositional-defiant disorder: Maintenance and prediction of 2-year outcome. Behavior Therapy, 34, 471–491.Google Scholar
Roth, J. K., Serences, J. T., & Courtney, S. M. (2006). Neural system for controlling the contents of object working memory in humans. Cerebral Cortex, 16, 1595–1603.Google Scholar
Röthlisberger, M., Neuenschwander, R., Cimeli, P., Michel, E., & Roebers, C. M. (2012). Improving executive functions in 5- and 6-year-olds: Evaluation of a small group intervention in prekindergarten and kindergarten children. Infant & Child Development, 21, 411–429.Google Scholar
Rueda, M. R., Rothbart, M. K., McCandliss, B. D., Saccomanno, L., & Posner, M. I. (2005). Training, maturation, and genetic influences on the development of executive attention. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 102, 14931–14936.Google Scholar
Rutter, M. (2000). Resilience reconsidered: Conceptual considerations, empirical findings, and policy implications. In Shonkoff, J. P. & Meisels, S. J. (Eds.), Handbook of early childhood intervention (2nd ed., pp. 6551–6682). New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Sameroff, A. (2010). A unified theory of development: A dialectic integration of nature and nurture. Child Development, 81, 6–22.Google Scholar
Sameroff, A. J., & Chandler, M. J. (1975). Reproductive risk and the continuum of caretaking causality. In Horowitz, F. D., Hetherington, M., Scarr-Salapatek, S., & Siegel, G. (Eds.), Review of Child Development Research (pp. 187–244). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Sameroff, A. J., & Fiese, B. H. (2000). Transactional regulation: The developmental ecology of early intervention. In Shonkoff, J. P. & Meisels, S. J. (Eds.), Handbook of early childhood intervention (2nd ed., pp. 135–150). New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Sampson, R. J., Raudenbush, S. W., & Earls, F. (1997). Neighborhoods and violent crime: A multilevel study of collective efficacy. Science, 277, 918–924.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Scott, S., & Dadds, M. R. (2009). Practitioner review: When parent training doesn't work: Theory-driven clinical strategies. Journal of Child Psychology & Psychiatry, 50, 1441–1450.Google Scholar
Schweinhart, L. J. (2005). Lifetime effects: The High/Scope Perry Preschool Study through age 40. Ypsilanti, MI: High/Scope Press.Google Scholar
Schweinhart, L. J., Barnes, H. V., & Weikart, D. P. (1993). Significant benefits: The High/Scope Perry Preschool Study through age 27 (Monographs of the High/Scope Educational Research Foundation, Number 10). Ypsilanti, MI: High/Scope Press.Google Scholar
Schweinhart, L. J., & Weikart, D. P. (2002). The Perry Preschool Project: Significant benefits. Journal of At-Risk Issues, 8, 5–8.Google Scholar
Shaw, D. S., Dishion, T. J., Supplee, L., Gardner, F., & Arnds, K. (2006). Randomized trial of a family-centered approach to the prevention of early conduct problems: 2-year effects of the family check-up in early childhood. Journal of Consulting & Clinical Psychology, 74, 1–9.Google Scholar
Shonkoff, J. P. (2010). Building a new biodevelopmental framework to guide the future of early childhood policy. Child Development, 81, 357–367.Google Scholar
Shonkoff, J. P. (2011). Protecting brains, not simply stimulating minds. Science, 333, 982–983.Google Scholar
Shonkoff, J. P. (2012). Leveraging the biology of adversity to address the roots of disparities in health and development. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 109, 17302–17307.Google Scholar
Shonkoff, J. P., Boyce, W. T., & McEwen, B. S. (2009). Neuroscience, molecular biology, and the childhood roots of health disparities: Building a new framework for health promotion and disease prevention. Journal of the American Medical Association, 301, 2252–2259.Google Scholar
Shonkoff, J. P., Garner, A. S., & Committee on Psychosocial Aspects of Child and Family Health, Committee on Early Childhood, Adoption, and Dependent Care, Section on Developmental and Behavioral Pediatrics. (2012). The lifelong effects of early childhood adversity and toxic stress. Pediatrics, 129, e232–e246.Google Scholar
Shonkoff, J. P., & Levitt, P. (2010). Neuroscience and the future of early childhood policy: Moving from why to what and how. Neuron, 67, 689–691.Google Scholar
Shonkoff, J. P., & Phillips, D. A. (Eds.). (2000). From neurons to neighborhoods: The science of early childhood development. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.Google Scholar
Sims, M., Saggers, S., Hutchins, T., Guilfoyle, A., Targowska, A., & Jackiewicz, S. (2008). Indigenous child care: Leading the way. Australian Journal of Early Childhood, 33, 56–60.Google Scholar
Smith, S. (1995). Evaluating two-generation interventions: Current efforts and directions for future research. In Smith, S. (Ed.), Two generation programs for families in poverty: A new intervention strategy (pp. 251–270). Westport, CT: Ablex.Google Scholar
Smith, S., & Zaslow, M. (1995). Rationale and policy context for two-generation interventions. In Smith, S. (Ed.), Two generation programs for families in poverty: A new intervention strategy (pp. 1–35). Westport, CT: Ablex.Google Scholar
Smyke, A. T., Zeanah, C. H., Fox, N. A., Nelson, C. A., & Guthrie, D. (2010). Placement in foster care enhances quality of attachment among young institutionalized children. Child Development, 81, 212–223.Google Scholar
Söderqvist, S., Nutley, S. B., Ottersen, J., Grill, K. M., & Klingberg, T. (2012). Computerized training of non-verbal reasoning and working memory in children with intellectual disability. Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, 6, 271.Google Scholar
Steinhardt, M. A., Jaggars, S. E., Faulk, K. E., & Gloria, C. T. (2011). Chronic work stress and depressive symptoms: Assessing the mediating role of teacher burnout. Stress & Health, 27, 420–429.Google Scholar
Stevens, C., Fanning, J., Coch, D., Sanders, L., & Neville, H. (2008) Neural mechanisms of selective auditory attention are enhanced by computerized training: Electrophysiological evidence from language-impaired and typically developing children. Brain Research, 1205, 55–69.Google Scholar
Tachibana, Y., Fukushima, A., Saito, H., Yoneyama, S., Ushida, K., Yoneyama, S., et al. (2012). A new mother–child play activity program to decrease parenting stress and improve child cognitive abilities: A cluster randomized controlled trial. PLoS ONE, 7, e38238.Google Scholar
Tang, Y. Y., Yang, L., Leve, L. D., & Harold, G. T. (2012). Improving executive function and its neurobiological mechanisms through a mindfulness-based intervention: Advances within the field of developmental neuroscience. Child Development Perspectives, 6, 361–366.Google Scholar
Verkerk, G., Jeukens-Visser, M., Houtzager, B., Koldewijn, K., van Wassenaer, A., Nollet, F., et al. (2012). The infant behavioral assessment and intervention program in very low birth weight infants: Outcome on executive functioning, behaviour and cognition at preschool age. Early Human Development, 88, 699–705.Google Scholar
Wass, S. V., Scerif, G., & Johnson, M. H. (2012). Training attentional control and working memory—Is younger, better? Developmental Review, 32, 360–387.Google Scholar
Webster-Stratton, C. (2005). The Incredible Years: A training series for the prevention and treatment of conduct problems in young children. In Hibbs, E. D. & Jensen, P. S. (Eds.), Psychosocial treatments for child and adolescent disorders: Empirically based strategies for clinical practice (2nd ed., pp. 507–555). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.Google Scholar
Werner, E., & Smith, R. (1982). Vulnerable but invincible: A study of resilient children. New York: McGraw–Hill.Google Scholar
Willoughby, M., Greenberg, M., Blair, C., & Stifter, C. (2007). Neurobehavioral consequences of prenatal exposure to smoking at 6 to 8 months of age. Infancy, 12, 273–301.Google Scholar
Wilson, W. J. (1990). The truly disadvantaged: The inner city, the underclass, and public policy. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Wilson, W. J. (1997). When work disappears: The world of the new urban poor. New York: Vintage.Google Scholar
Yoshikawa, H. (1995). Long-term effects of early childhood programs on social outcomes and delinquency. Future of Children, 5, 51–75.Google Scholar
Zigler, E. (2011). A warning against exaggerating the benefits of preschool education programs. In Zigler, E., Gilliam, W. S., & Barnett, W. S. (Eds.), The pre-K debates: Current controversies and issues (pp. 197–200). Baltimore, MD: Brookes.Google Scholar
Zigler, E. F., & Muenchow, S. (1992). Head Start: The inside story of America's most successful educational experiment. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar
Zigler, E., & Seitz, V. (1980). Early childhood intervention programs: A reanalysis. School Psychology Review, 9, 354–368.Google Scholar