MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W1967733909 · doi:10.1080/10409289.2011.578911

Reading to Children and Listening to Children Read: Mother–Child Interactions as a Function of Principal Reader

2012· article· en· W1967733909 sur OpenAlex
Sandra Martin‐Chang, Odette N. Gould

Pourquoi ce travail est dans la base

Une base qui oublie comment elle a trouvé un travail ne peut pas être vérifiée. Voici les voies qui ont admis celui-ci.

affAu moins un auteur déclare une institution canadienne dans l'instantané OpenAlex épinglé.
fundUn bailleur canadien est enregistré sur le travail.
aboutLe titre ou le résumé porte un signal canadien du lexique géographique.

Notice bibliographique

RevueEarly Education and Development · 2012
Typearticle
Langueen
DomainePsychology
ThématiqueReading and Literacy Development
Établissements canadiensMount Allison University
Organismes subventionnairesNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
Mots-clésPsychologyActive listeningReading (process)PraiseLiteracyDevelopmental psychologySession (web analytics)Miscue analysisSocial psychologyPedagogyReading comprehensionLinguisticsCommunication

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

Abstract Research Findings: Although storybook reading has received considerable research attention, listening to children read has been the source of much less inquiry. In this study, 40 mother–child dyads were videotaped during adult-to-child and child-to-adult reading. Relations between book-related themes (e.g., types of talk), maternal evaluative feedback (e.g., praise, criticism), maternal miscue feedback (e.g., graphophonemic clues, terminal feedback), and child engagement (e.g., laughter, questions) were analyzed. The results suggest that the development of literacy appreciation and literacy skill can occur during the same storybook-reading session. Specifically, when mothers read to their children, communication about the illustrations was associated with increased child engagement, yet a positive correlation was also observed between text-related productions and child engagement. When children read to their mothers, text-related productions were featured more prominently. After children made reading errors (miscues), graphophonemic and terminal feedback were the 2 most frequent responses by mothers. In addition, graphophonemic cues were positively associated with child engagement. Practice or Policy: In sum, the results demonstrate that adult-to-child and child-to-adult reading serve the goals of both literacy acquisition training and literacy appreciation; furthermore, orienting children toward the text during either session did not hamper child engagement. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS We wish to thank Jill Fraser and Jessica Chapman for their help in data scoring and Dr. Nina Howe, Megan Ladd, and Kyle Levesque for their careful reading of the manuscript. We gratefully acknowledge financial support from the McCain Fellowship Foundation to Sandra Martin-Chang and from Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada (NSERC) to Odette N. Gould. Notes a The total number of times each production category occurred across the entire sample (i.e., 40 mother–child dyads). b The percentage of occurrences in each grouping coded into the corresponding variable (e.g., the percentage of book-related theme productions coded as being text related). c The mean number of occurrences for each type of production within each dyad. d The standard deviation for the mean number of occurrences for each type of production within each dyad. *p < .05. **p < .01. ***p < .001. a The total number of times each production category occurred across the entire sample (i.e., 40 mother–child dyads). b The percentage of occurrences in each grouping coded into the corresponding variable (e.g., the percentage of book-related theme productions coded as being text related). c The mean number of occurrences for each type of production within each dyad. d The standard deviation for the mean number of occurrences for each type of production within each dyad. *p < .05. **p < .01. ***p < .001. *p < .05. **p < .01. ***p < .001. Note. The correlation between the difficulty of the book and the reading score was r = −.23, p = .16; the correlation between the difficulty of the book and the comprehension score was r = −.16, p = .31. a Mean scores of the children whose mothers read each book. Note. The correlation between the difficulty of the book and the reading score was r = .37, p = .02; the correlation between the difficulty of the book and the comprehension score was r = .40, p = .01. a Mean reading scores for the children who read each book. a Each time the mother's finger was lifted off the page and set back down it was counted as one instance of orienting either to the illustrations or to the text. Therefore, orienting to the text may have been underestimated in cases in which a mother tracked every word on the page without ever raising their finger (which would have only been counted once). Most often, mothers who tracked all of the text lifted their fingers after each sentence.

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.

Prédiction distillée sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,000
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesaucune
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Observationnel · Signal consensuel: Observationnel
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: Empirique
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,367
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,720

Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0000,000
Bibliométrie0,0000,000
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0000,000
Communication savante0,0000,000
Science ouverte0,0000,000
Intégrité de la recherche0,0000,000
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0000,000

Scores machine (provisoires)

Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.

Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.

Tête enseignante Opus0,014
Tête enseignante GPT0,310
Écart entre enseignants0,296 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle