Tracing the Cognitive–Motor Connection: Prospective-Longitudinal Associations Between Early Parent–Toddler Literacy Activities and Subsequent Gross Motor Skills at School Entry
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background/objectives: Early literacy is widely promoted, yet its broader developmental benefits remain underexamined regarding key indicators of brain development. This study examines whether early literacy exposure in toddlerhood predicts motor skill development at the end of kindergarten. Methods: Participants comprised 1006 boys and 991 girls from the Quebec Longitudinal Study of Child Development (QLSCD) birth cohort. Early literacy stimulation was measured at age 2 years using parent reports of frequency of shared reading, looking at books or comics, and pre-writing activities such as scribbling and tracing. At age 6 years, child motor development was assessed by trained examiners. Sex-stratified multiple regression models were examined, adjusting for pre-existing and concurrent child and family characteristics. Results: Early literacy stimulation was significantly associated with better motor control skills among girls (β = 0.10, p < 0.05). For boys, a non-significant positive trend was observed for both motor and locomotion skills. Conclusions: Our findings underscore the lasting influence of early literacy stimulation and subsequent motor skills—particularly for girls who may receive less gross motor encouragement than boys. As such, promoting literacy-rich environments in toddlerhood is a family strategy to support healthy, confident, and active youth development.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".