M. Boonzaaijer1, O. Oudgenoeg-Paz2, I. Suir1, J. Nuysink1, C. Volman2, M. Jongmans2
1University of Applied Science Utrecht, Research Group Lifestyle and Health, Utrecht, Netherlands, 2Utrecht University, Faculty of Social and Behavioral Sciences, Department of Pedagogical and Educational Sciences, Utrecht, Netherlands
Background: Gross motor development is the most important indicator of wellbeing and general development of a baby. Variability in this development makes interpretation of motor assessment outcomes complicated. This variability is linked to multiple factors, i.e., birth weight, gestational age, and affordances at home. As Dutch infants appear to be slower in their gross motor development compared to other Western cultures, it is important to also explore culturally specific factors such as Parental Beliefs (PB). The ‘Developmental Niche’ is a theoretical framework focusing on the cultural construction of child development. PB, rearing practices, and the physical and social environment are all interlinked and together shape infant development. Therefore, insight into the PB on motor development is important to understand motor development.
Purpose: To gain insight into the change in PB on motor development of parents of typically developing Dutch infants between 3.5 and 15.5 months.
Methods: The Parental Beliefs on Motor Development questionnaire (PB-MD) was administered at 3.5 and 15.5 months. Additional questions completed parent- and infant characteristics. Gross motor development of infants was assessed with the Alberta Infant Motor Scale using home videos made by parents. The reliability of the PB-MD was examined and a repeated-measures ANOVA was applied to examine the change in beliefs.
Results: In total 78 parents returned the PB-MD at 3.5 and 15.5 months. A confirmatory factor analysis with GLS extraction revealed that the five-factor model fitted the data well (χ2(73)=80.75, p =.250 at 3.5 months and χ2(73)=75.62, p =.394 at 15.5 months). Factor loadings exceeded the .30 except for the subscales ‘Own Pace’ and ‘Order’. Therefore these two subscales were not included in the analysis. Internal consistency of the subscales at 3.5 months (N=110) and at 15.5 months (N=78) was between .62 and .83 except for the subscales: ‘Own Pace’ and ‘Natural development’. A one-way repeated-measures ANOVA showed a significant change in the subscales Stimulation F (1, 77) = 3.85, p = .053) and Natural development F (1,77) = 14.87, p = .000. Parental education (p = 0.033) was significant as control variable. Infant motor development at 9.5 months (p = 0.004) was a significant predictor of the change in parental beliefs.
Conclusion(s): The PB on motor development of Dutch parents significantly changes over time. When their baby is 15.5 months, Dutch parents are less attracted to the belief that motor development should be actively stimulated compared to their beliefs at 3.5 months. At 15.5 months, parents are more drawn to the belief that motor development happens naturally and should not be intervened with. Interestingly, parents of infants with lower scores on gross motor development at 9.5 months showed a greater decline in the subscale Stimulation than parents with an infant with higher motor scores at 9.5 months.
Implications: More research is needed into the beliefs of parents who have an infant at risk for developmental delay including diverse cultural and economical backgrounds. Parental beliefs regarding motor development should be taken into account when developing new intervention strategies for infants at risk.
Funding, acknowledgements: The Netherlands Organization for Scientific Research (NWO), Teachers Grant (023.006.070).
Keywords: Parental Beliefs, Infant, Motor development
Topic: Paediatrics
Did this work require ethics approval? Yes
Institution: University Medical Centre Utrecht, The Netherlands
Committee: Medical Ethical Board METC/ UMCU Utrecht, The Netherlands
Ethics number: METC number 16/366C
All authors, affiliations and abstracts have been published as submitted.
