Hostname: page-component-6766d58669-bkrcr Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-05-15T14:41:24.092Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Vocalization and physiological hyperarousal in infant–caregiver dyads where the caregiver has elevated anxiety

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 February 2022

Celia G. Smith*
Affiliation:
Institute of Psychiatry, Psychology & Neuroscience, King’s College London, London, UK
Emily J. H. Jones
Affiliation:
Birkbeck, University of London, London, UK
Tony Charman
Affiliation:
Institute of Psychiatry, Psychology & Neuroscience, King’s College London, London, UK
Kaili Clackson
Affiliation:
University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK
Farhan U. Mirza
Affiliation:
University of Plymouth, Plymouth, UK
Sam V. Wass
Affiliation:
University of East London, London, UK
*
Corresponding author: Celia G. Smith, email: celia.smith@kcl.ac.uk
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Co-regulation of physiological arousal within the caregiver–child dyad precedes later self-regulation within the individual. Despite the importance of unimpaired self-regulatory development for later adjustment outcomes, little is understood about how early co-regulatory processes can become dysregulated during early life. Aspects of caregiver behavior, such as patterns of anxious speech, may be one factor influencing infant arousal dysregulation. To address this, we made day-long, naturalistic biobehavioral recordings in home settings in caregiver–infant dyads using wearable autonomic devices and miniature microphones. We examined the association between arousal, vocalization intensity, and caregiver anxiety. We found that moments of high physiological arousal in infants were more likely to be accompanied by high caregiver arousal when caregivers had high self-reported trait anxiety. Anxious caregivers were also more likely to vocalize intensely at states of high arousal and produce intense vocalizations that occurred in clusters. High-intensity vocalizations were associated with more sustained increases in autonomic arousal for both anxious caregivers and their infants. Findings indicate that caregiver vocal behavior differs in anxious parents, cooccurs with dyadic arousal dysregulation, and could contribute to physiological arousal transmission. Implications for caregiver vocalization as an intervention target are discussed.

Information

Type
Regular Article
Creative Commons
Creative Common License - CCCreative Common License - BY
This is an Open Access article, distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution licence (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted re-use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
Copyright
© The Author(s), 2022. Published by Cambridge University Press
Figure 0

Table 1. Demographic data split by low/high caregiver GAD-7 scores

Figure 1

Figure 1. (a) Illustration of raw data showing a caregiver and child wearing the equipment. From top to bottom: infant arousal composite (see SM sections 3.1–3.3 for details of how this was calculated); infant arousal (no AR) – after removal of autocorrelation from the arousal data (see SM section 3.4); caregiver arousal composite; caregiver arousal (no AR); caregiver vocal intensity; (b) illustration of the equipment used for home monitoring; (c) pie chart showing the distribution of caregiver vocal intensity codes after splitting into low/med/high-intensity values.

Figure 2

Figure 2. (a) Schematic illustrating the analysis shown in (b)–(c). (b) change in infant arousal relative to “peak” arousal moments of the caregiver, defined using variable centile thresholds. (c) summary plot indicating group differences in change of infant reactivity to caregiver arousal peaks, showing infant arousal relative to the time 0 threshold values from b. Where the permutation-based temporal clustering analyses indicated that a significant peak in infant arousal was observed relative to the caregiver “peak” arousal event, the datapoint has been drawn in yellow.

Figure 3

Figure 3. (a) Likelihood of high-intensity caregiver vocalizations around caregiver arousal peaks. Y-axis shows the effect size of the difference between the observed and the control data for the high GAD-7 (blue) and the low GAD-7 (red) groups, calculated as described in the Methods. Yellow circles indicate results showing a significant difference between the observed and the control data. (b) Violin plot showing the proportion of high-intensity caregiver vocalizations. No significant difference was observed between groups. (c) Violin plot showing one sample time-window of the analysis iterated across multiple time windows in (d) and (e). The plot shows the likelihood of a high-intensity vocalization in the time window 10 min prior to a high-intensity vocalization. The effect size of the real versus control comparison has been drawn separately for the high and low GAD-7 groups in (d). (d) Line plot showing the same comparison as shown in (c), but iterated across multiple time windows (i.e., examining the likelihood of the high-intensity vocalization in the time window 9 min prior to a high-intensity vocalization, and so on). Where a circle has been drawn, this indicates a timepoint where a significant difference was observed between the real and control data, following the statistical steps described in the Methods. (e) the same plot examining low-intensity vocalizations. For both groups, significant increases are only observed for the time window up to 5 min before and after each vocalization.

Figure 4

Figure 4. (a) Caregiver arousal relative to high-intensity caregiver vocalization in the low GAD-7 group; (b) caregiver arousal relative to high-intensity caregiver vocalization in the high GAD-7 group; (c) infant arousal relative to high-intensity caregiver vocalization in the low GAD-7 group; (d) infant arousal relative to high-intensity caregiver vocalization in the high GAD-7 group. High GAD-7 caregivers and their infants show more sustained arousal increases around intense caregiver vocalizations. Lines colored black indicate index data (time series following a high-intensity caregiver vocalization) while gray colored lines indicate control data (time series following a moment where the caregiver was at an equivalent arousal level but did not vocalize intensely). Dots marked red indicate areas of significant (p > .05) event-related change.

Supplementary material: File

Smith et al. supplementary material

Smith et al. supplementary material
Download Smith et al. supplementary material(File)
File 33.8 MB