In this section, we briefly described the data we used to assess the impact of maternal depression on early child vocabulary in Peru. Then, we presented some descriptive statistics of the different rounds of data used in our analysis. Since we restricted our study to the sample that had information across all rounds, we also briefly described the results from the sample attrition analysis.
2.1. Data
2.1.1. Description
To measure the effects of MMH on child development, we used the first 3 rounds of the Young Lives Peru Survey (YL), conducted by the University of Oxford and core-funded by the UK Department for International Development. The YL survey was also being conducted in Vietnam, Ethiopia, and India (Andra Pradesh region). As of now, 5 rounds of data have been collected, which can be publicly accessible through the Young Lives website (
https://www.younglives.org.uk/content/data-research). This was a rich longitudinal survey that included a complete set of individual, parental, household, and community characteristics, including early developmental, economic and demographic indicators, as well as information about social assistance programs in every community. The baseline sample of YL was cluster stratified, with 20 districts randomly selected across the country. Because the YL project was particularly interested in children living in poorer households, the sampling frame excluded the top 5 percent of districts as measured by a district poverty ranking. Despite excluding the least poor, it has been documented that the data reflects the Peruvian population in a broad range of indicators. Within each of the selected districts, 100 households with at least one child born between 2001 and 2002 (index child) were chosen randomly to participate in the project. Within each household, YL surveyed an index child who was born in 2000–2001 and was followed from infancy until they reached their mid-teens. The baseline round was conducted in 2002 when the index children were aged 6–20 months, the first follow-up conducted in 2006/2007, when they were between 4 and 6 years old, and the last round in 2009/2010, when they were between 7 and 8 years of age. The attrition rate between the 3 rounds of data collection was approximately 4 percent, which was low by international standards [
14].
Of the 2000 index children in the baseline round, we focused our analysis on the sample of 1095 of them that were present in the first 3 waves for whom data on maternal mental health and Peabody Picture Vocabulary Test (PPVT) scores were available. We presented below tests for differences in some characteristics between the included and excluded samples.
2.1.2. Measures of a Dimension of Child Development
We use PPVT scores [
15] as the measure of early vocabulary skills, a strong predictor of later cognitive ability, including writing and reading skills, schooling, and labor market outcomes later in life [
13,
16,
17,
18]. In the YL survey, this outcome was measured using the Spanish version of the PPVT instrument. The PPVT measures receptive vocabulary; children are shown slides, each of which has 4 pictures, and were asked to identify the picture that corresponded to objects or actions named by the test administrator. Children did not need to name the objects or actions or be able to read or write them. It was just an object identification or association process. The test continued until the child had made 6 mistakes in the last 8 slides. The number and the level of difficulty of questions differed according to children’s age (see [
19]). We, therefore, constructed age-specific z-scores by subtracting the month-of-age-specific mean of the raw score and dividing by the month-of-age-specific standard deviation. PPVT scores were available in the 2nd and 3rd rounds of the YL survey, i.e., when children were 4–6 and 7–8 years.
2.1.3. Measures of Maternal Mental Health
The explanatory variable was constructed using the information on maternal common mental disorders from the Self Reporting Questionnaire 20 items (SRQ20), a screening (case-finding) tool included in the YL survey. The SRQ20 consisted of 20 yes/no questions with a reference period of the previous 30 days. The tool had a number of limitations, including the small number of items, the fact that it was not diagnostic, and could not separate out anxiety from depression. Still, the tool had been recommended by the World Health Organization and has acceptable levels of reliability and validity in developing countries. To the extent that depression and anxiety are closely related, and both of them can undermine the quality of care mothers provide to their children, the information gathered from the questionnaire was very valuable. Henceforth, we will use the term mental health to refer to both cases of depression and/or anxiety.
Using the responses to the questionnaire, we estimated 3 mental health indexes: The simple average of all items and 2 standardized items using factor analysis and principal components analysis. As we explain below, we used the information on maternal mental health from the first round of the YL survey.
2.1.4. External Shocks
We exploited the availability of data on exposure to external shocks in the first round of the Peruvian YL. Caregivers were asked about events or changes that negatively affected the household welfare, and that occurred since the mother of the index child was pregnant until the day of the interview. The survey respondents described the event, and the enumerator classified it among the 14 categories. We grouped these categories into 6 groups of shocks, including natural disaster, crop or livestock loss, decrease in food availability, job or income loss, death or severe illness, and birth/new household member.
2.1.5. Other Relevant Variables
In addition to the outcomes of interest and data on shocks, we used additional variables available in the survey that we used to address potential concerns to our identification strategy, as we explained in the following section. These additional variables consist of indexes that captured information on wealth, housing quality, and consumption of durable goods. These indexes were created using information reported by the caregivers. In each round, they were asked about the assets they own, characteristics of the household (materials of the floor, walls, etc.), among others. To collect consumption data, caregivers were asked how much they spent on non-food items during the last 30 days or on durable goods over the last 12 months.
2.2. Descriptive Statistics
Table 1 reports the summary statistics of the variables used in this paper for the sample under analysis. We separated the variables into 4 panels by mother, child, household, and community characteristics. Columns 1–3 presented mean, standard deviation, and the number of observations for the sample in the 2006/2007 round. Similarly, columns 4–6 showed the same statistics for the 3rd YL round (2009/2010).
As presented in Panel A, mothers were 31–35 years old on average between the 2 rounds. On average, 16% of these mothers reported being of indigenous origin, and although 79% of them reported they were literate, 57% had not completed primary school. Finally, statistics showed that 30% of mothers had mental health issues in 2002, and 94% of them reported that they attended antenatal care while they were pregnant from the index child. In terms of children’s characteristics (Panel B), half of index children were boys and 16% of them were the eldest. Cognitive outcomes, as measured by PPVT Z-scores, were practically unchanged between the 2 rounds, even if, as expected, the mean score increased as the children age, reflecting a larger vocabulary. The average child in the sample scored 0.06 standard deviations above the mean PPVT score of a reference child in both 2006/2007 and 2009/2010. Children’s height-for-age Z-scores, on the other hand, showed an improving trend.
To summarize information at the household level, we created some indexes that captured information on wealth, housing quality, and consumption of durable goods (see Panel C). Each of these indexes took values between 0 to 1. A household with an index level close to 0 (1) indicated that the family was worse (better) in the particular dimension that the index was measuring. In 2007, the average household in the sample under analysis was below the median of the distribution in all indexes. The wealth and housing quality indexes of the average household from our sample remained similar between the 2 rounds. Only the consumption of durable goods index increased between 2006–2009, which can be related to an increase in the number of older household members that consumed more expensive durable goods. Moreover, 58% of households under analysis lived in urban areas and had 5.5 members on average, 1.3 of them were school-aged children in 2006/2007. Three years after, 18% of households were more likely to live in urban areas.
Appendix A compared the sample under analysis with the observations excluded from the study. There are only 2 differences in maternal characteristics between these 2 sub-samples, and the difference remained statistically significant at 10%: Mothers in the sample were less likely to have completed primary school and were less likely to live in urban areas.
2.3. Empirical Strategy
What were the ways in which maternal depression can undermine children’s cognitive outcomes? We framed our analysis following Frank and Meara’s Model (FMM) [
20] of maternal depression effects on the formation of children’s skill, which was inspired by Cunha and Heckman’s inter-generational model of human capability formation [
13,
21]. FMM assumed that a skill
was constituted in period
t, through a production function
f and several determinants that occurred in the previous period (
t − 1). In sum, the model can be represented as follows:
where
is the level of skill formation,
represents parental skill attributes (education, cognitive abilities, etc.),
indicates monetary and non-monetary investments in child capabilities, and
is maternal mental health status at time
t − 1. Mental health problems that interfered with mother-child interactions or undermined maternal behavior during
t − 1 could potentially undercut the effectiveness of parental skills and/or reduce the productivity of investments and result in deficient children’s cognitive ability later in life.
To empirically estimate this theoretical model, we exploited information on maternal mental health during the 1st round and data on cognitive outcomes for our sample of 1095 children for which we have information of PPVT Z-scores from the 2nd and 3rd rounds of data collection. A naïve estimation of the effects of exposure to lagged maternal stress on cognitive development will regress a measure of maternal stress in 2002 on the PPVT Z-scores in 2006/2007 and 2009/2010, using the following specification:
where
represents the PPVT Z-scores for child
i in period
t (i.e., 2006/2007 or 2009/2010).
captures the value of any of the three maternal mental health indexes we estimated using data from 2002.
,
, and
are vectors of child, mother, and household/community observable and time-varying characteristics that can lead to differences in cognitive ability across children and influence their parents’ investments in them. These vectors include all the variables presented in
Table 1, all of which have been documented to affect children cognition (for a review, see [
6]).
represents a random, idiosyncratic error term.
Under the assumption of complete exogeneity of , the parameter of interest, , measures performance in the PPVT at each period t for children whose mothers were depressed in 2002. The fact that the specification used measures of maternal depression and child’s vocabulary taken at different points in time addressed, to a large extent, the possibility of reverse causality. However, the probability that there were unobserved factors, such as pollution, access to services, or changes that had affected the household between rounds—that influenced maternal mental health and children’s outcomes cannot be entirely ruled out. Consequently, we used an instrumental variable (IV) approach to address the possibility of omitted variable bias.
In addition, the IV estimation helped to remedy the problem of measurement error in the main explanatory variable, which could be a relevant factor in the context of this paper. In particular, our main explanatory variable captured symptoms of mental health issues that affected mothers 30 days prior to the survey in 2002. We used those symptoms and estimated indexes of mental health, which constituted proxies of the unobserved, latent variable
Thus, estimations of Equation (2) that incorporated the proxy for maternal depression can produce inconsistent estimators of
and lead to attenuation bias of these coefficients if
and the error term
are negatively correlated [
22,
23].
The IV approach hinges on finding observable covariates that are correlated with maternal mental health, but which do not affect child cognitive status or other possible omitted variables. Considering this, we define our instrument by relying on the existing evidence that identifies the negative effect of exposure to exogenous shocks during pregnancy or during the first months after birth on children cognitive outcomes [
3,
24,
25,
26,
27,
28,
29]. Some of these papers find that the main mechanism driving this relationship is maternal stress induced by the shock. Therefore, by exploiting the fact that the first round of YL asked caregivers about exposure to shocks, we use them to instrument maternal mental health. We excluded natural disasters and decreases in food availability due to lack of variation (less than 0.18% of households reported any of these shocks) and job or income loss because it can be highly correlated with the fact that the woman just gave birth. Hence, we restricted our analysis to the remaining three shocks–loss of crop or livestock, death or severe illness, or changes in their household composition—as potential instruments of maternal mental health. In this sense, Equation (2) corresponds to our second stage estimation, and our first stage will be given by the following:
where
indicates if the mother of child
i was affected by shock
j and
represent the vectors of child, mother, and household characteristics described in Equation (2).
The validity of the instrument had to meet 2 conditions. First, it had to be relevant. In other words, the correlation between the shock and maternal mental health had to be high and statistically different from zero. To test this condition, we presented statistics of the shocks and measures of maternal mental health in
Table 2, panels A and B. Panel C summarizes the correlations between each measure of maternal mental health and the three shocks under analysis. All correlations were statistically significant. In particular, the correlation between the loss of crop or livestock and the different indexes of maternal mental health ranges between 0.34 to 0.70.
The second condition for the instrument to be valid was exogeneity. In other words, suffering a shock during pregnancy or during the 1st months after birth should not have an impact on children’s vocabulary at the age of 5 other than through the impact on maternal mental health in the period when the shock occurred. There were 3 potential concerns that might affect this assumption, but we aimed to address those concerns with our specification. First, there was the concern of the nutritional effect of an income shock. A past shock can affect children’s nutritional status in
t − 1, which can then translate into worse cognitive development later in life. To address this concern, we controlled for several children anthropometric measures. A 2nd concern was the learning resources: The shock could limit the exposure of the child to enriching opportunities or materials that might help her to improve her vocabulary development during childhood. To control for this potential channel, we included in our specification some measures of household wealth and consumption in
t − 1. Finally, the 3rd concern was that the shock limited additional stimulation that might have been provided to her by other members in the household, in addition to the mother and her partner. For example, in extended households, non-working relatives tended to contribute to childcare duties. The shock may forced these other household members to find a job, which could, in turn, limit opportunities for child stimulation and consequent development. Since extended households were larger than the non-extended ones, we controlled for that characteristic by including the variable household size in our model. Alternatively, we tested the exogeneity assumption in our model by estimating the correlation between the measure of vocabulary and the shock, conditional on the variables that captured differences in availability of learning resources, child’s nutritional status, and the rest of the control variables. These results are presented in
Appendix B.
Finally, having at least three instruments and a large set of potential control variables posited the challenge of selecting the “right” set of them. On the one hand, using too few controls or the wrong ones may lead to omitted variable bias. However, by using too many, our model may be affected by overfitting. To address this issue, we estimate the parameters of interest using the Instrumental Variables Least Absolute Shrinkage and Selection Operator (IV-LASSO), a routine for estimating structural parameters in linear models with many controls and/or instruments. In particular, we used the post-double selection (PDS) methodology [
30,
31] that was applied in Stata’s built-in commands by Ahrens et al. [
32].