Developmental Neural Correlates of Social Interaction

Children develop in a sea of reciprocal social interaction, but their brain development is predominately studied in non-interactive contexts (e.g., viewing photographs of faces). This dissertation investigated how the developing brain supports social interaction. Specifically, novel paradigms were used to target two facets of social experience—social communication and social motivation—across three studies in children and adults. In Study 1, adults listened to short vignettes—which contained no social information—that they believed to be either prerecorded or presented over an audio-feed by a live social partner. Simply believing that speech was from a live social partner increased activation in the brain’s mentalizing network—a network involved in thinking about others’ thoughts. Study 2 extended this paradigm to middle childhood, a time of increasing social competence and social network complexity, as well as structural and functional social brain development. Results showed that, as in adults, regions of the mentalizing network were engaged by live speech. Taken together, these findings indicate that the mentalizing network may support the processing of interactive communicative cues across development. Given this established importance of social-interactive context, Study 3 examined children’s social motivation when they believed they were engaged in a computer-based chat with a peer. Children initiated interaction via sharing information about their likes and hobbies and received responses from the peer. Compared to a non-social control, in which children chatted with a computer, peer interaction increased activation in mentalizing regions and reward circuitry. Further, within mentalizing regions, responsivity to the peer increased with age. Thus, across all three studies, social cognitive regions associated with mentalizing supported real-time social interaction. In contrast, the specific social context appeared to influence both reward circuitry involvement and age-related changes in neural activity. Future studies should continue to examine how the brain supports interaction across varied real-world social contexts. In addition to illuminating typical development, understanding the neural bases of interaction will offer insight into social disabilities such as autism, where social difficulties are often most acute in interactive situations. Ultimately, to best capture human experience, social neuroscience ought to be embedded in the social world.

An exploration of parent ivolvement in Response to Intervention (RTI) in Title I schools

Research demonstrates that parental involvement positively impacts student achievement and enhances targeted instruction. Notably, however, little research currently exists on how schools involve parents in Response to Intervention (RTI), a framework for implementing targeted, tiered, research-based instruction. The purpose of this study was to interview selected parents, teachers, RTI specialists, and principals in three Title I elementary schools in one school district, plus one district-level administrator, in order to examine how elementary schools currently involve parents in RTI prereferral interventions, and to understand the factors that might facilitate or challenge such parent involvement. I employed a comparative case study qualitative design with each elementary school as the main unit of analysis. I conducted individual, in-depth interviews that lasted approximately 45-60 minutes with a total of 33 participants across the three school sites, including 11 parents, 12 teachers, and six RTI specialists, three principals, and one district-level administrator. I also analyzed documents related to RTI processes that are available through websites and participants. I used Strauss and Corbin’s (1998) three-step scheme for thematic/grounded theory analysis, and Atlas.ti as the electronic tool for management and analysis. Analyses of the data revealed that personnel across the sites largely agreed on how they explain RTI to parents and notify parents of student progress. Parents mostly disagreed with these accounts, stating instead that they learn about RTI and their child’s progress by approaching teachers or their own children with questions, or by examining report cards and student work that comes home. Personnel and parents cited various challenges for involving parents in RTI. However, they all also agreed that teachers are accessible and willing to reach out to parents, and that teachers already face considerable workloads. It appears that no district- or school-wide plan guides parent involvement practices in RTI at any of the three schools. Finally, I present a discussion of findings; implications for teachers, RTI implementation leaders, and Title school leaders; study limitations; and possibilities for future research.