PREDICTORS OF THE COGNITIVE DEVELOPMENT OF CHILDREN ADOPTED FROM ROMANIAN ORPHANAGES by Sara J. Morison M.A., Simon Fraser University, 1993 THESIS SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY in the Department of PSYCHOLOGY O Sara J. Morison 1997 SIMON FRASER UNIVERSITY May, 1997 All rights reserved. This work may not be reproduced in whole or in part, by photocopy or other means, without permission of the author. APPROVAL Name: Sara J. Morison Degree: PhD Title of Thesis: Predictors of the Cognitive Development of Children Adopted from Romanian Orphanages Examining Committee: Chair: Michael Maraun, PhD Elinor W. Ames, PhD Associate Professor Senior Supervisor Philip Winne, PhD Professor - LnternaVExternal Examiner Charlotte ~ohnktonP, hD Associate Professor Dept. of Psychology, U.B.C. External Examiner Date Approved N A 7 3, LSy j- PARTIAL COPYRIGHT LICENSE I hereby grant to Sirnon Fraser Unil-ersir y the right to lend my thesis, ~roiecot r extended essav (the title o which is shown below) to user; of the Simon Fraser ~ni\;ersityL ibrary, and to make partial or single copies only for such users or in response to a request from the library of any other university, or other educational institution, on its own behalf or for one of its users. I further agree that permission for multiple copying of this work for scholarly purposes may be granted by me or the Dean of Graduate Studies. It is understood -hat c~pyrjngo r publication of this work for financial gain shall not be allon-ed nithout my mitten permission. Title of Thesis/Project/Extended Essay Author: - (signature) (date) I iii Abstract Cognitive development was evaluated in children who had spent at least 8 months in a Romanian orphanage (RO) and two comparison groups of children: a Canadian-Born, non- adopted, never institutionalized comparison group (CB) and an Early Adopted comparison group adopted from Romania before the age of 4 months (EA). Children were assessed on the Stanford-Binet and the Bracken Basic Concept Scale. Parent-child interaction was evaluated during free play and a teaching task, and the quality of the home environment (HOME) was assessed. RO children scored lower than CB children on all cognitive measures, and on most measures RO children scored lower than EA children. RO children were more impulsive than CB children, and were more helpless in their responding and less task oriented than CB and EA children. RO children's developmental status was positively related to HOME scores, to parental sensitivity and teaching ability, and to children's task- oriented behavior, and negatively related to time in institution and to children's impulsivity. DEDICATION To Douglas and Charlie for all their love, patience, and support through this and all our adventures. And a special welcome to Christopher who planned his entrance into this world at a wondefil time! ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS I am deeply indebted to Dr. Elinor Arnes for her guidance, support, and teaching throughout my years of graduate work. Her questioning and insight have fostered the true scientist in me. I am also grateful to Dr. Patricia Kerig and Dr. Philip Winne for their thoughtful comments in the preparation of this dissertation, and to Dr. Ray Koopman for always being at hand for a query about statistics. A special thank-you to Kim Chisholm and Lime Fisher for their thoughtful insights, their support, and their fiiends~p.T o Gillian Wark I owe a debt of gratitude for always being there for me over the last several years. I will always be grateful to the many volunteers without whose long hours of coding this thesis would not have been possible. I wish to acknowledge the help and support I received fiom Dr. Byron Egeland and his team in Minnesota for the use of their parent-child interaction coding scales, and to Ann- Louise Ellwood and my team of volunteer coders who spent many hours coding the interaction sequences. And finally, a very special thank you to the families who participated in this work by sharing their own experiences in an effort to benefit parents who plan to adopt internationally in the future. TABLE OF CONTENTS .. ............................................................................................................. APPROVAL -11 ... .............................................................................................................. ABSTRACT 111 DEDICATION ..........................................................................................................i v ....................................................................................... ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS v LIST OF TABLES ..................................................................................................... x LIST OF FIGURES ...................................................................................................x iv .......................................................................................... INTRODUCTION 1 ........................................ Effects of Institutional Rearing on Intelligence 1 ............................ Effects of Institutional Rearing on Problem-solving Skills 3 ............................................................. Predictors of Progress Post-adoption 4 ................. Previous Results on this Sample of Romanian Orphans (Time 1) 8 ......................................................................................... The Present Study -9 .................................................................................................... METHOD -12 .................................................................................................. Participants -12 ..................................................................................................... Procedure -19 ...................................................................................... Cognitive Measures 20 ................................................................................. Problem-solving Skills 23 ............................................................................... Parent-child Interaction -34 The Home Observation for Measurement of the Environment ...................................................................................... Inventory (HOME) -43 .................................................................................................... RESULTS -47 ..................................................... Group Differences on the Stanford-Binet 48 vii .............................. Group Differences on the Bracken Basic Concept Scale 56 .......................... Group Differences on Problem-solving Task Performance 64 Group Differences on Problem-solving Strategies ......................................6. 4 ............................ Group Differences on Parent-child Interaction Variables 73 ........................................................... Group Differences on HOME Scores 78 Relation of Antecedent Variables to Cognitive Performance at Time 2 ....................................................................................................... 81 Relation of Antecedent Variables to Problem-solving Strategies ....................................................................................................... at Time 2 83 Relationships Between Current Family Variables and Children's ............................................................................... Cognitive Development -84 Relationships Between Current Child Behavior and Children's ................................................................................ Cognitive Performance 109 ............................................................................................. DISCUSSION 118 ............................................................................................ REFERENCES 134 APPENDICES A A Brief Description of the Parent-child Interaction ......................................................................................... Rating Scales 144 B Brief Description of the Subscales of the Preschool Version of the Home Observation for Measurement of the ................................................... ..................... Environment (HOME) i. -148 C Brief Description of the Subscales of the Elementary School Version of the Home Observation for Measurement ................................................................ of the Environment (HOME) -150 D Mean (Standard Deviation) Cognitive Scores for all Children .............. 152 E Mean (Standard Deviation) Problem-solving Strategies of .......................................................................... 54-month-old Children -153 F Proportion of Older RO and CB Children using Problem-solving .............................................................................................. Strategies 154 G Mean (Standard Deviation) Parent-child Interaction Ratings on 3 1 Matched Pairs of 54-month-old RO and ........................................................................................ CB Children 155 viii H Mean (Standard Deviation) Parent-child Interaction Ratings .................... on Matched Pairs of 54-month-old RO and EA Children 156 I Mean (Standard Deviation) Parent-child Interaction Ratings ..................... on Matched Pairs of 54-month-old CB and EA Children 157 J Mean (Standard Deviation) HOME Scores on 26 Matched ........................................ Pairs of 54-month-old RO and EA Children 15 8 K Mean (Standard Deviation) HOME Scores on 26 Matched Pairs of 54-month-old CB and EA Children ........................................ 159 L Correlations Between Time in Institution and T i e 1 Developmental Status Variables and Problem-solving .............................................................. Strategies in the RO Sample .I60 M Correlations between Family Variables and Problem-solving .............................................................. Strategies in the RO Sample 16 1 N ~orrel&onsb etween Family Variables and Problem-solving .............................................................. Strategies in the CB Sample -162 0 Correlations between Family Variables and -Problem-solving ............................................................... Strategies in the EA Sample 163 P Correlations between HOME Subscales and Cognitive Scores ...................................................... of the 54-month-old RO Children -164 Q Correlations between HOME Subscales and Cognitive Scores ....................................................... of the 54-month-old CB Children -165 R Correlations between HOME Subscales and Cognitive Scores ........................................................ of the 54-month-old EA Children -166 S Correlations between HOME Subscales and Problem-solving ...................................... Strategies of the 54-month-old RO Children 167 T Correlations between HOME Subscales and Problem-solving ..................................... Strategies of the 54-month-old CB Children 168 U Correlations between HOME Subscales and Problem-solving ..................................... Strategies of the 54-month-old EA Children 169 V Correlations between HOME Subscales and Cognitive Scores ...................................................................... of Older RO Children 170 W Correlations between HOME Subscales and Cognitive Scores ...................................................................... of Older CB Children .I 7 1 X Correlations between HOME Subscales and Problem-solving ...................................................... Strategies of Older RO Children -172 Y Correlations between HOME Subscales and Problem-solving ....................................................... Strategies of Older CB Children 173