Dimensionalizing adversity in childhood and their links with symptom measures: Data from a new sample of Japanese institutionalized children

Background: Although strong evidence exists for a link between early childhood adversity and poorer developmental outcomes, previous research has primarily focused on investigating the effect of either one single adverse... [ view full abstract ]

Background: Although strong evidence exists for a link between early childhood adversity and poorer developmental outcomes, previous research has primarily focused on investigating the effect of either one single adverse event, or the cumulative effect of multiple environmental factors. In contrast, Sheridan & McLaughlin (2015) suggested a dimensional approach (e.g. threat vs. deprivation), by which key insights into underlying mechanisms linking early environmental experiences and negative outcomes may be gained. This study investigates these two dimensional structures of childhood adversity and their relationship to social, behavioural and emotional outcomes in a group of institutionalized children in Japan.

Method: 213 caregivers from 26 children’s homes completed the following questionnaires for 457 children (8 – 15 years old): (1) Family background checklist, (2) Referral reason checklist, (3) maltreatment checklist, and (4) the Strength and Difficulty Questionnaire (parent rating).

Result: 17 types of childhood adverse experiences were coded from the three checklists and subjected to a principal components analysis to identify which events converged to form independent dimensions of adversity. 13 of those resulted in a 4-factor solution. These factors include (a) poverty, (b) deprivation, (c) parental mental illness, and (d) threat. Factor scores were then correlated with the 4 SDQ difficulties subscales: Hyperactivity/Inattention (HI), Emotional symptoms (ES), Conduct problems (CP), and Peer problems (PP). The threat factor correlated positively with ES, CP and PP. Interestingly, parental mental illness negatively correlated with HI and CP. Neither Deprivation nor Poverty factor scores correlated with outcomes.

Discussion: Results from this study support the hypothesis of threat vs. deprivation dimension of early adversity. However, these factors, except threat, did not predict children’s emotional/behavioral scores. One possible limitation is that the symptoms are only reported by caregivers rather than children themselves. Moreover, the accurate assessment of children’s pre-institutionalization adverse experience remains a challenge.