Echoing Parental Scaffolding Style in Co–Constructed Narratives: Its Impact on Executive Function Development in Diverse Early School-Age Children
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Research Findings: Early elementary school is a crucial time for the development of executive functions, but less is known about the impact of parent-child narratives on executive function development in children of this age group. This study aims to investigate the influence of parental scaffolding styles in parent-child co-constructed narratives in the development of transitional kindergartners’ executive function. The sample comprised 35 Hispanic and non-Hispanic parent-child dyads, who were video recorded discussing a past experience at home. Video recordings were transcribed and coded for parental scaffolding strategies. Through principal component analysis, three scaffolding styles were identified: elaborative, eliciting, and echoing. Children’s executive function was measured using the pencil tap task. Hierarchical linear regression analysis revealed that parents’ echoing scaffolding style was positively and significantly associated with children’s executive function outcomes, after controlling for child expressive language, maternal education, and parent dominant narrative languages. Practice or Policy: These findings highlight that the way parents scaffold their children’s narratives can have a positive impact on their development of executive function. It also emphasizes the need for educators and practitioners to recognize the role of parent-child language interactions in supporting children’s cognitive development, and to collaborate with families to promote positive developmental outcomes.
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.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.010 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".