Journal of Child and Family Studies

, Volume 27, Issue 8, pp 2533–2540 | Cite as

Evaluation of a Sesame Street Multimedia Intervention for Families Transitioning Out of the Military

  • Michelle D. Sherman
  • Amy Monn
  • Jessica L. Larsen
  • Abigail Gewirtz
Original Paper


Although transitioning out of the military can be stressful for everyone in the family, the children’s experience has received minimal attention in both clinical lore and research. This study is an evaluation of Sesame Workshop’s multimedia program for families who are transitioning out of the military into civilian life; the program is aimed at improving parents’ confidence and skills in assisting their children with the transition, and at improving young children’s transition-related adjustment. Via a randomized controlled trial design, we evaluated the utilization, acceptability, and impact of this free, online program with 200 military caregivers. Caregivers who received the Sesame program reported increased self-efficacy in helping their child cope with the transition (e.g., making new friends, talking with their child about leaving the military) compared to those assigned to the control condition. Further, caregivers in the intervention condition reported fewer overall child emotional and behavioral problems and a significant reduction in levels of hyperactivity/inattention in their children. Further, the primarily online modality of the Sesame program yielded high caregiver satisfaction and utilization; this approach may warrant further research as an effective means of reaching busy military families.


Military families Transitions Sesame Workshop Randomized controlled trial Online intervention 


Author Contributions

M.D.S.: designed and executed the study, collaborated in writing the paper. A.M.: collaborated with the study design and analyses; collaborated in writing the paper. J.L.M.: collaborated with the study design, analyzed the data, and wrote most of the results. A.G.: collaborated with the design and execution of the study, collaborated in writing the paper.


Funding for this evaluation was provided by Sesame Workshop, based on a grant they received from Bristol-Myers Squibb.

Compliance with Ethical Standards

Conflict of Interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Ethical Approval

All procedures performed in studies involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the University of Minnesota Institutional Review Board and with the 1964 Helsinki declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards.

Informed Consent

Informed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in the study.

Supplementary material

10826_2018_1083_MOESM1_ESM.docx (27 kb)
Supplementary Information


  1. Cohen, D., Betancourt, J., & Kotler, J. (2014). Sesame workshop’s talk, listen, connect. In A. Jordan & D. Romer (Eds.), Media and the well-being of children and adolescents (pp. 226–246). Oxford, England: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  2. Cohen, S., Kamarck, T., & Mermelstein, R. (1983). A global measure of perceived stress. Journal of Health and Social Behavior, 24, 386–396.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Davis, L., Hanson, S., Zamir, O., Gewirtz, A. H., & DeGarmo, D. (2015). Associations of contextual risk and protective factors with fathers’ parenting practices in the post-deployment environment. Psychological Services, 12, 250–260.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  4. Department of Defense. (2015). Demographics profile of the military community. Accessed 1 Feb 2018.
  5. Dickey, W. C., & Blumberg, S. J. (2004). Revisiting the factor structure of the strengths and difficulties questionnaire: United States, 2001. Journal of the American Academy of Child & Adolescent Psychiatry, 43(9), 1159–1167.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Gardner, F., & Shaw, D. S. (2008). Behavioral problems of infancy and preschool children (0–5). In M. Rutter et al. (Eds.), Rutter’s child and adolescent psychiatry (5th ed., pp. 882–893). Massachusetts: Blackwell Publishing.Google Scholar
  7. Gewirtz, A. H., Erbes, C., Polusny, M. A., Forgatch, M. S., & DeGarmo, D. (2011). Supporting military families during and after deployment: the need for parenting interventions. Professional Psychology: Research and Practice, 42, 56–62.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Gewirtz, A. H. & Youssef, A. (Eds.) (2016). Parenting and children’s resilience in military families. New York, NY: Springer Publishing.Google Scholar
  9. Gilbody, S., Richards, D., Brealey, S., & Hewitt, C. (2007). Screening for depression in medical settings with the Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ): A diagnostic meta-analysis. Journal of General Internal Medicine, 22, 1596–1602.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  10. Goodman, A., & Goodman, R. (2009). Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire as a dimensional measure of child mental health. Journal of the American Academy of Child & Adolescent Psychiatry, 48, 400–403.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Hosek, J., Kavanagh, J., & Miller, L. (2006). How deployments affect service members. Santa Monica, CA: RAND Corporation.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Jensen, E. W., James, S. A., Boyce, W. T., & Hartnett, S. A. (1983). The family routines inventory: development and validation. Social Science & Medicine, 17, 201–211.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Kroenke, K., Spitzer, R. L., & Williams, J. B. (2003). The Patient Health Questionnaire-2: validity of a two-item depression screener. Medical Care, 41, 1284–1294.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. Oades-Sese, G. V, Cohen, D, Allen, J. W. & Lewis, M. (2014). Building resilience in young children the Sesame Street Way. In S. Prince-Embury, & D. Saklofske (Eds.), Resilience interventions for youth in diverse populations (pp. 181–201). New York, NY: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Ortiz, C. D., Cozza, S. J., Fullerton, C. S., & Ursano, R. J. (2013). Feasibility of a multimedia program for parentally bereaved children. Child & Youth Care Forum, 42, 489–506.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Pargament, K. I., Mahoney, A., Exline, J. J., Jones, J. W., & Shafranske, E. P. (2013). Envisioning an integrative paradigm for the psychology of religion and spirituality. In K. Pargament (Ed), APA Handbook of Psychology, Religion, and Spirituality (pp. 3–19). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.Google Scholar
  17. Pincus, S. H., House, R., Christensen, J., & Adler, L. E. (2001). The emotional cycle of deployment: a military family perspective. Journal of the Army Medical Department, (April/June), 615–623.Google Scholar
  18. Sherman, M. D. (2014). Children of military veterans: an overlooked population. Society for Research in Child Development (SRCD) Social Policy Report, 28(3), 18–20.Google Scholar
  19. Søndergaard, S., Robertson, K., Silfversten, E., Anderson, B., Meads, C., Schaefer, A., & Larkin, J. (2015). Families support to transition: a systematic review of the evidence. Cambridge, UK: RAND Europe.Google Scholar
  20. Stone, L. L., Otten, R., Engels, R. C., Vermulst, A. A., & Janssens, J. M. (2010). Psychometric properties of the parent and teacher versions of the Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire for 4-to 12-year-olds: a review. Clinical Child and Family Psychology Review, 13, 254–274.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  21. Taylor, J. M. (2015). Psychometric analysis of the Ten-Item Perceived Stress Scale. Psychological Assessment, 27, 90–101.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. Walker, D. I., Cardin, J. F., Chawla, N., Topp, D., Burton, T., & Wadsworth, S. M. (2014). Effectiveness of a multimedia outreach kit for families of wounded veterans. Disability and Health Journal, 7, 216–225.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Family Medicine and Community HealthUniversity of MinnesotaMinneapolisUSA
  2. 2.University of MinnesotaMinneapolisUSA
  3. 3.The Lukin Center for PsychotherapyHobokenUSA

Personalised recommendations