Search for: All records

Decades of research has revealed a relationship between childhood socioeconomic status (SES) and brain development at the structural and functional levels. Of particular note is the distinction between income and maternal education, two highly correlated factors which seem to influence brain development through distinct pathways. Specifically, while a families’ income-to-needs ratio is linked with physiological stress and household chaos, caregiver education influences the day-to-day language environment a child is exposed to. Variability in either one of these environmental experiences is related to subsequent brain development. While this work has the potential to inform public policies in a way that benefits children, it can also oversimplify complex factors, unjustly blame low-SES parents, and perpetuate a harmful deficit perspective. To counteract these shortcomings, researchers must consider sociodemographic differences in the broader cultural context that underlie SES-based differences in brain development. This review aims to address these issues by (a) identifying how sociodemographic mechanisms associated with SES influence the day-to-day experiences of children, in turn, impacting brain development, while (b) considering the broader cultural contexts that may differentially impact this relationship. 

Building a robust vocabulary in grade school is essential for academic success. Children from lower socioeconomic status (SES) households on average perform below their higher SES peers on word learning tasks, negatively impacting their vocabulary; however, significant variability exists within this group. Many children from low SES homes perform as well as, or better than, their higher SES peers on measures of word learning. The current study addresses what processes underlie this variability, by comparing the neural oscillations of 44 better versus worse word learners (ages 8–15 years) from lower SES households as they infer the meaning of unknown words. Better word learners demonstrated increases in theta and beta power as a word was learned, whereas worse word learners exhibited decreases in alpha power. These group differences in neural oscillatory engagement during word learning indicate there may be different strategies employed based on differences in children’s skills. Notably, children with greater vocabulary knowledge are more likely to exhibit larger beta increases, a strategy that is associated with better word learning. This sheds new light on the mechanisms that support word learning in children from low SES households.