Pregnant women should be encouraged to stop
attributing common memory lapses to their growing baby, according
to Australian researchers. And doctors and midwives should promote
the fact that ‘placenta brain’ is not an inevitable part of
pregnancy and new motherhood.
It is a popular belief that pregnancy and
motherhood affects a woman’s memory, causing them to become more
forgetful and absentminded – commonly referred to as ‘baby brain’.
But research
published in the February issue of the British Journal of
Psychiatry finds no evidence that pregnancy or motherhood
affects women’s brain power.
The research team, led by Professor Helen Christensen from The
Australian National University, recruited 1,241 women aged 20-24
and tested their cognitive functioning. Four areas of cognition
were assessed: cognitive speed, working memory, and immediate and
delayed recall.
The women were followed up at four-year intervals in 2003 and 2007,
and given the same cognitive tests. Seventy-six women were pregnant
at the follow-up assessments, 188 became pregnant between
assessments, and 542 remained childless. Women who had multiple
pregnancies during the 8 year study period were excluded from the
analysis as this would introduce additional factors.
The researchers found no significant
differences in cognitive change for those women who were pregnant
during the assessments and those who were not. In addition, there
were no significant differences between those women who had become
mothers and those who had not. This led them to conclude that
neither pregnancy nor motherhood have a detrimental effect on
women’s cognitive capacity – a finding that directly contradicts
previous studies.
So if ‘baby brain’ doesn’t exist, why do so
many women think they experience it? Lead researcher Professor
Christensen said: “Part of the problem is that pregnancy manuals
tell women they are likely to experience memory and concentration
problems – so women and their partners are primed to attribute any
memory lapse to the ‘hard to miss’ physical sign of pregnancy.
“Pregnant women may also shift their focus
away from work issues to help them prepare for the birth of their
new baby, while new mothers selectively attend to their baby.
However, this shift in attentional focus is adaptive, and certainly
cannot be labelled a ‘cognitive deficit’.”
On the back of their findings, the researchers
suggest it’s time for parents and professionals to stop believing
in the ‘baby brain’ myth. Writing in the British Journal of
Psychiatry, Professor Christensen and her team said: “Not so
long ago, pregnancy was ‘confinement’ and motherhood meant the end
of career aspirations. Our results challenge the view that mothers
are anything other than the intellectual peers of their
contemporaries.
“Women and their partners need to be less
automatic in their willingness to attribute common memory lapses to
a growing or new baby. And obstetricians, family doctors and
midwives may need to use the findings from this study to promote
the fact that ‘placenta brain’ is not inevitable.”
Previous studies have shown that pregnant
women perform worse than non-pregnant women on memory and other
cognitive tests. But Professor Christensen and colleagues claim the
findings from these studies may be the result of biased sampling.
Professor Christensen said: “Previous studies recruited women
volunteers already pregnant. In our study the women were recruited
prior to pregnancy, so we had already tested their cognitive
function before they became either pregnant or mothers. This is
critical as it is the first time that pre-pregnancy cognitive
scores were available. We could thus see if pregnancy or motherhood
produced any greater change in cognition compared to the controls.
Our study used a representative population sample too, rather than
a convenience sample.”
For further information, please
contact:
Liz Leicester
or Deborah Hart in the Communications
Department.
Telephone: 020 7235 2351 Extensions. 6298 or 6127
References:
Christensen H, Leach LS and Mackinnon A (2010) Cognition in pregnancy and motherhood: prospective cohort study, British Journal of Psychiatry, 196: 126-132