PARENT-CHILD INTERACTION IN SHARED-COMPUTER ACTIVITIES: AN EXPLORATORY STUDY EXAMINING PARENT-CHILD INTERACTION WITH A MOBILE DEVICE
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The present exploratory study examined the shared-computer behaviours of parent-child dyads in order to examine how (and if) parents interact with their children when using mobile digital devices and parents’ perceptions of their child’s technology use. Little is known about how technologies are used with young children and how to maximize and support young children’s learning when they are introduced to these technologies. In total, 104 parents (n = 72 mothers and n = 32 fathers; one parent per child) participated in an observation session where parent-child interactions using a mobile device (Apple iPad™) were recorded in order to observe first-hand the supports and exchanges between parent and child. Parents displayed verbal, emotional-verbal, physical and emotional-physical supports. Parents completed a survey that assessed their perceptions of their children’s technology use as well as the verbal, emotional and physical supports parents report providing to support their children’s use of technology. Following the observation session, parents were interviewed to report their feelings about their experience in the study, whether they feel they should help their child when their child is using technology, how parents introduced technology and/or games on technology to their child(ren), and parents’ opinions on which critical aspects are important to address when deciding to use or not use technology. Results indicate that although parents do not differ as a function of gender or experience (novice versus advanced users of mobile devices) for the amount and type of support they provide their child while interacting with the iPad™, they provide a great deal of supports to their child. Results will be important for parents, educators, and child care providers as they make clear parents’ perceptions, behaviours and personal experiences in introducing technology to their children.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".