Thematic analysis reveals differences in child development practices in a home visiting intervention, indicating cultural impacts on parenting.
The applied field of “Global Early Childhood Development”, developed in WEIRD (Western, Educated, Industrialised Rich and Democratic) settings, asserts universal frameworks and understandings of early childhood development pathways. This field advocates for the roll out of parenting interventions aimed at improving child development outcomes, predominantly for children living in the Majority World. This article examines areas of divergence between knowledge about early child development and infant rearing from this applied academic field of “Global Early Childhood Development” and local knowledge in Alexandra Township, a multi‐ethnic and multi‐linguistic area in Johannesburg, South Africa. Based on thematic analysis of 107 home visit reports, and six triangulating interviews with frontline care workers who wrote the reports, this study identifies four areas of divergence between Global Early Childhood Knowledge and local knowledge, namely differences in knowledge about (1) the value of discriminate and responsive caregiving, (2) whether or not infants are sensing and sentient, (3) the value of exclusive breast‐feeding and infant‐led feeding, and the (4) causes and treatment for developmental delays and infant sickness. These findings highlight the imperative need for including diverse conceptualisations of child development and addressing structural and contextual influences on child development in Majority World intervention design and implementation.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Dawson et al. (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: