Group differences in receptive language did not hold when controlling for SES, and receptive language was the covariate retained in the main analyses¶
Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · causalr2·q3
Currency · newest study 2012 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person
Subclaims¶
Reading the evidence codes
q is the design tier, i the impact, n the sample, and the kind with its r
the rigour judged within that kind: what each code means.
This claim: no standardized effect is recorded in observations/ for it yet, so no benchmark reading is possible.
q3 i? Never-fostered children had higher receptive vocabulary scores than both foster groups, but these differences were non-significant after controlling for SES. → Lewis-Morrarty 2012
Evidence¶
Lewis-Morrarty 2012¶
Lewis-Morrarty, E., Dozier, M., Bernard, K., Terracciano, S., & Moore, S. (2012). Cognitive Flexibility and Theory of Mind Outcomes Among Foster Children: Preschool Follow-up Results of a Randomized Clinical Trial. Journal of Adolescent Health. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jadohealth.2012.05.005
q3 · i? · causal · r2
Preliminary analyses showed never-fostered children attained higher PPVT-III receptive language scores than both foster groups, but these differences were non-significant when controlling for the SES composite. Receptive language was the only covariate retained in the main analyses, as child age and SES were no longer significant once it was included.
"Children in the NFC group attained higher receptive language scores than ABC children, F(1, 39) = 6.32, p = .02, and the FCC children, F(1, 42) = 12.58, p = .00. However, these group differences did not hold when controlling for SES, p’s > .05."
Discussion¶
Related Claims¶
- Foster children who received the ABC intervention showed stronger theory of mind at preschool age than foster children who received a control intervention — related
- Foster children who received the ABC intervention in infancy showed stronger cognitive flexibility at preschool age than foster children who received a control intervention — related
- The maternal-education group difference in neural attentional modulation persists after controlling for receptive language scores — related
- Foster children who received a control intervention showed a specific post-switch (set-shifting) deficit on the card-sort task, with no group difference on the pre-switch trials — related
- Foster children who received the control intervention scored significantly lower on the post-switch task than never-fostered comparison children — related
- A language-based bedtime routine at age 3 predicted longer nighttime sleep duration at age 5 and higher language abilities and receptive vocabulary at age 5 — related
- Controlling for SES, monolingual children outperform both simultaneous and sequential bilinguals on single-language English receptive and expressive vocabulary measures — related
- Descriptive analyses suggest game-based learning may be less beneficial for cognitive outcomes in low-SES students than high-SES students, but this is preliminary — related
Page metadata
| Field | Value |
|---|---|
type |
claim |
id |
receptive-language-group-differences-ses-mediated |
title |
Group differences in receptive language did not hold when controlling for SES, and receptive language was the covariate retained in the main analyses |
description |
Group differences in receptive language did not hold when controlling for SES, and receptive language was the covariate retained in the main analyses |
status |
review |
evidence_strength |
weak |
newest_evidence |
2012 |
generated |
by process:wiki-ingest on 2026-10-17 |
trust |
unverified — no one has confirmed this page's content |
sources |
1 — lewis-morrarty-2012 |
Frontmatter is the page's machine-readable record — see the Schema & Guide.