MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4200126626 · doi:10.1111/jcal.12631

Learning to <scp>eRead</scp>: A qualitative exploration of young children's developing <scp>eReader</scp> practices

2021· article· en· W4200126626 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Computer Assisted Learning · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicChild Development and Digital Technology
Canadian institutionsImpact
FundersU.S. Department of Education
KeywordsAffordanceLiteracyPsychologyDevelopmental psychologyNoveltyDocumentationUsabilityExploratory researchQualitative researchPedagogyComputer scienceSocial psychologyCognitive psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Background Previous eBook studies were primarily cross‐sectional surveys or experimental studies providing a snapshot of the impact of eBook reading on children's emergent literacy skills. Scholars have yet to characterize more fine grain developmental progressions in the use of eReaders and similar devices – that is, how children's eBook‐related practices evolve over time and what might be changing behaviourally over the course of repeated readings for any age group. Objectives This is the first study to characterize young children's (2 to 3 years) use of eReaders over the span of several months under semi‐naturalistic conditions. Methods Twenty five mothers and their 2.5‐ to 3.5‐year‐old child engaged in a series of documentation exercises and interviews around use of a novel eReader device. This study is exploratory and deductive in nature, and hypotheses were not set forth a priori. Results and Conclusions The results of the present study suggest that children develop increasing mastery of the affordances of eReaders as their device exposure increases. Over time, their ability to independently engage with devices rapidly increases. They transition from needing technical support from parents and high levels of encouragement to attend to literacy content over hotspots, to sometimes using the device independently, to considering the device a mainstay in their home – no longer a novelty. Implications for practice and/or policy The developmental usability patterns noted in this study extend our naturalistic understanding of young children's dexterity with digital devices and point to methodological approaches that might yield more ecologically valid findings in future studies.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.014
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Meta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.173
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.014
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.002
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.067
GPT teacher head0.361
Teacher spread0.294 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it