How does activity context relate to parents’ responses to preschoolers’ errors and correct math statements?

IF 1.8 2区 心理学 Q3 PSYCHOLOGY, DEVELOPMENTAL Journal of Experimental Child Psychology Pub Date : 2025-01-31 DOI:10.1016/j.jecp.2024.106191
Can Çarkoğlu, Sarah H. Eason
{"title":"How does activity context relate to parents’ responses to preschoolers’ errors and correct math statements?","authors":"Can Çarkoğlu,&nbsp;Sarah H. Eason","doi":"10.1016/j.jecp.2024.106191","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Research shows that parent–child math activities in the home positively relate to children’s math learning. Although there is evidence suggesting that the nature of parent guidance during these interactions is important for children’s math learning, it is unclear how parents respond to preschoolers’ errors and correct math statements and whether responses vary across activity contexts. We examined parents’ responses to errors and correct statements during structured math activities with 49 dyads of parents and 4- and 5-year-olds. Dyads were assigned to either an Informal Learning condition (<em>n</em> = 25) or a Formal Learning condition (<em>n</em> = 24). We identified instances where children responded correctly or incorrectly to math prompts and coded parents’ feedback based on the extent to which it supported children’s autonomy and learning. Overall, parents most frequently responded in ways that encouraged children’s continued math engagement and thinking (elaborative guidance). However, multiple regression analyses revealed that parents were more likely to not respond to errors during informal learning than during formal learning, and parents were more likely to give the correct answer following an error during formal learning compared with during informal learning. Parents in both conditions were equally likely to offer elaborative support following errors. Moreover, parents did not differ in their responses following children’s correct statements across conditions. These findings suggest, irrespective of activity context, that parents can realize opportunities to effectively support preschoolers’ math learning. Yet, given differences in parents’ responses to errors, the findings have implications as to how we can tailor recommendations to promote high-quality parent–child math interactions.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":48391,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Experimental Child Psychology","volume":"253 ","pages":"Article 106191"},"PeriodicalIF":1.8000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Experimental Child Psychology","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S002209652400331X","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, DEVELOPMENTAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Research shows that parent–child math activities in the home positively relate to children’s math learning. Although there is evidence suggesting that the nature of parent guidance during these interactions is important for children’s math learning, it is unclear how parents respond to preschoolers’ errors and correct math statements and whether responses vary across activity contexts. We examined parents’ responses to errors and correct statements during structured math activities with 49 dyads of parents and 4- and 5-year-olds. Dyads were assigned to either an Informal Learning condition (n = 25) or a Formal Learning condition (n = 24). We identified instances where children responded correctly or incorrectly to math prompts and coded parents’ feedback based on the extent to which it supported children’s autonomy and learning. Overall, parents most frequently responded in ways that encouraged children’s continued math engagement and thinking (elaborative guidance). However, multiple regression analyses revealed that parents were more likely to not respond to errors during informal learning than during formal learning, and parents were more likely to give the correct answer following an error during formal learning compared with during informal learning. Parents in both conditions were equally likely to offer elaborative support following errors. Moreover, parents did not differ in their responses following children’s correct statements across conditions. These findings suggest, irrespective of activity context, that parents can realize opportunities to effectively support preschoolers’ math learning. Yet, given differences in parents’ responses to errors, the findings have implications as to how we can tailor recommendations to promote high-quality parent–child math interactions.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
4.50
自引率
7.70%
发文量
190
期刊介绍: The Journal of Experimental Child Psychology is an excellent source of information concerning all aspects of the development of children. It includes empirical psychological research on cognitive, social/emotional, and physical development. In addition, the journal periodically publishes Special Topic issues.
期刊最新文献
Development of false memories in 5- and 8-year-olds: The role of working memory maintenance mechanisms Parental apologies as a potential determinant of adolescents’ basic psychological needs satisfaction and frustration Statistical learning as a buffer: Investigating its impact on the link between home environment and reading achievement Children’s memory and generalization of science concepts learned using comparison The development of Mooney face perception in 6- to 11-month-old infants
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1