This is a summary of two studies that examines the effects of pedagogical intervention on the emotional availability (EA) of early childhood professionals’ (ECPs’) and their ability to consider the different temperamental characteristics of children in early childhood education and care (ECEC) group interactions. The study takes a professionally developmental approach, and the long-term training and video-based feedback are used to strengthen the emotional availability of professionals in group interactions. The study uses a before-and-after research design, which can be used to identify changes over time in the interaction of professionals in the intervention group compared to the control group. 

The effects of the intervention on interaction between early childhood professionals and children in ECEC are discussed in this summary based on two previously published studies (Harkoma et al., 2021; Harkoma et al., 2022). This summary provides comprehensive answers to the following two research questions: 1) What effects does pedagogical intervention have on the emotional availability of professionals in group interactions? and 2) What effects does pedagogical intervention have on professionals’ ability to be emotionally available in a group to children with different temperament characteristics? 

This is Europe's first intervention study to apply the theoretical framework of Emotional Availability (EA) in ECEC. Similar intervention study has been implemented previously in United States with promising results (Biringen et al., 2012). The framework of Emotional Availability approaches interaction between adult and children from the perspective of attachment theory (Bowlby, 1969). Emotional availability refers to the reciprocity of interaction, and adult's ability to perceive children's emotional signals and respond to them appropriately (Biringen et al., 2014; Emde, 2000). The study also examined the connection between the quality of interaction and children’s temperament, an area in which very little previous research exists in ECEC (De Schipper et al., 2008; Rudasill & Rimm-Kaufman, 2009). Temperament is defined using Rothbart's psychobiological approach, in which temperament is “constitutionally based individual differences in reactivity and self-regulation, influenced over time by genes, maturation and experience” (Rothbart, 2012, p. 9; see also Rothbart & Derryberry, 1981). 

The early childhood professionals in the intervention group received theoretical training that included, for example, knowledge on attachment relationships, sensitive interaction and considering children’s individual characteristics in group interactions. The training lasted three months, and it included five 90-minute sessions with the supervisor familiar with the subject. During the training, professionals also received video-based feedback on their interactions with the group of children. It was important that the feedback given to the professionals focused on their individual and professional strengths in interaction. The aim of the feedback was to reinforce their experiences of success with the group of children. The training was designed to support individual and team reflection, as it gave professionals the opportunity to participate in discussions and express their views on children and their interactions with them. Reflection on interaction continued after the training with a diary that was written regularly and returned to the researchers by the end of the study. The diaries were used to assess intervention fidelity of professionals.

A total of 74 early childhood professionals and 274 children participated in the study. The final pool of professionals in the first study was 61 (intervention group 41; control group 20) and children in the second study was 136 (intervention group 87; control group 49). Written consent was received from the participating professionals and children's guardians for the study. The voluntary nature of the children's consent was ensured by observing their verbal and nonverbal communication during video observation. According to the preliminary ethical assessment conducted by the Research Ethics Committee in the Humanities and Social and Behavioural Sciences (University of Helsinki), the study was ethically acceptable. The research data was collected by videoing and observing interactions between early childhood professionals and children using the Emotional Availability Scales (Biringen et al., 2014). The method included dimensions adult sensitivity, structuring, non-intrusiveness, non-hostility, and child responsiveness and involvement. The study period was nine months and in the first study, video observations were conducted before the intervention training, six months and nine months after the beginning of the study. In the second study, video observation conducted before the intervention training, and nine months after the beginning of the study were used in the data analyses. EA dimensions were assessed by trained and certified researcher. In addition, inter-rater reliability of EA assessments was achieved by using the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) at r > 0.80 with the assistance of an external EA trained researcher who was blind to the background information of study participants. In the second study, temperament survey for children’s guardians was used to assess children’s individual differences in temperament. The survey data was collected by using the Early Childhood Behavior Questionnaire and Children's Behavior Questionnaire forms (Putnam et al., 2006; Rothbart et al., 2001). The questionnaires included a Likert-type scale of 1=never, 4=about half of the time and 7=always. The study included temperament dimensions Positive Anticipation, High Intensity Pleasure, Activity Level, Impulsivity, Discomfort, Fear, Anger/Frustration, Sadness, Soothability, Inhibitory Control, Attentional Focusing, Low Intensity Pleasure, and Perceptual Sensitivity. The reliability of the temperament dimensions was evaluated with a satisfying result of Cronbach’s α 0.641–0.910. The quantitative data were analyzed using statistical methods such as repeated measures analysis of variance (ANOVA) and covariance analysis (ANCOVA). The regularity of the professionals' reflective diary entries was described quantitatively.

The results of the first study showed that the emotional availability, especially sensitivity and non-intrusiveness of early childhood professionals in the intervention group, increased during the intervention compared to the control group. This means that the professionals became more able to express their emotions and receive emotional signals from the children without being overly intrusive towards them. According to the results of second study, the emotional availability of professionals in the intervention group increased in relation to the different temperament characteristics of children compared to the control group. Most differences between the study groups were found in children who had a more active temperament and stronger tendency to seek pleasurable experiences. Differences in terms of professionals’ emotional availability were also evident among children who had challenges to focus their attention and regulate their own behavior and emotions. Based on the results, it appears that the intervention is particularly beneficial for the children who belong to the risk group in terms of temperament, and who needs adult sensitive interaction and emotional support in ECEC. The conclusions of the study expand the theoretical and practical understanding of pedagogical interventions and their effects on the quality of interaction in ECEC. The implementation and effects of the intervention are examined using the Ecosystem Model of Inclusive Early Childhood Education (European Agency for Special Needs and Inclusive Education, 2017). The potential of the intervention to support adult’s professional development and child belongingness, engagement, and learning among all children in ECEC is discussed. In addition, the benefits and limitations of the intervention are discussed from the perspective of community, regional, and national structures in ECEC.

Biringen, Z., Altenhofen, S., Aberle, J., Baker, M., Brosal, A., Bennett, S., Coker, E., Lee, C., Meyer, B., Moorlag, A., & Swaima, R. (2012). Emotional availability, attachment, and intervention in center-based child care for infants and toddlers. Development and Psychopathology, 24, 23– 34. Biringen, Z., Derscheid, D., Vliegen, N., Closson, L., & Easterbrooks, M. A. (2014). Emotional availability (EA): Theoretical background, empirical research using the EA scales, and clinical applications. Developmental Review, 34, 114–167. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dr.2014.01.002. Bowlby, J. (1969). Attachment and loss. New York Basic Books. De Schipper, J. C., Tavecchio, L. W. C., & Van IJzendoorn, M. H. (2008). “Children’s Attachment Relationships with day Care Caregivers: Associations with Positive Caregiving and the Child’s Temperament.” Social Development 17 (3): 454–470. doi:10.1111/j.1467-9507.2007.00448.x. Emde, R. N. (2000). Next steps in emotional availability research. Attachment and Human Development, 2, 242–248. European Agency for Special Needs and Inclusive Education. (2017). Inclusive Early Childhood Education: New Insights and Tools – Final Summary Report. (M. Kyriazopoulou, P. Bartolo, E. Björck-Åkesson, C. Giné and F. Bellour, Eds.), Odense, Denmark. Harkoma, S. M., Sajaniemi, N. K., Saha, M., & Suhonen, E. (2022). The effects of PedaSens intervention on early childhood professionals’ emotional availability. Journal of Early Childhood Education Research, 11(2), 121–150. https://journal.fi/jecer/article/view/116188/68681 Harkoma, S. M., Sajaniemi, N. K., Suhonen, E., & Saha, M. (2021). Impact of pedagogical intervention on early childhood professionals’ emotional availability to children with different temperament characteristics. European Early Childhood Education Research Journal, 29(2), 183–205. https://doi.org/10.1080/1350293X.2021.1895264 Putnam, S. P., Gartstein, M. A., & Rothbart, M. K. (2006). Measurement of fine-grained aspects of toddler temperament: The Early Childhood Behavior Questionnaire. Infant Behavior and Development, 29, 386–401. Rudasill, K. M. & Rimm-Kaufman, S. E. (2009). “Teacher–Child Relationship Quality: The Roles of Child Temperament and Teacher–Child Interactions.” Early Childhood Research Quarterly 24 (2): 107–120. doi:10.1016/j.ecresq.2008.12.003. Rothbart, M. K. (2012). Advances in temperament: History, concepts, and measures. In M. Zentner & R. L. Shiner (Eds.), Handbook of temperament, pp. 3–20. New York: Guilford Press. Rothbart, M. K., Ahadi, S. A., Hershey, K. L., & Fisher, P. (2001). Investigations of temperament at three to seven years: The Children’s behavior questionnaire. Child Development, 72(5), 1394–1408. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-8624.00355 Rothbart, M. K., & Derryberry, D. (1981). “Development of Individual Difference in Temperament.” In M. E. Lamb, & A. L. Brown (Eds.), Advances in Developmental Psychology, pp. 37–86. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.