Zahra Halavani, H. Henny Yeung, Senay Cebioğlu, Tanya Broesch
It is known that infant-directed speech (IDS) plays a key role in language development. Previous research, however, has also identified significant variability across societies in terms of how often IDS occurs. For example, some studies report very little IDS in non-western, small-scale societies – including children growing up in small-scale societies in Tanna, Vanuatu. This is surprising given that IDS is widely assumed as a common feature of human caregiving based on research conducted in urbanised populations which are more well-studied. Here, we propose that IDS is only one of a suite of important caregiving behaviours that are produced during interactions with infants, which may vary by culture, perhaps being replaced by other, non-verbal infant-directed behaviours (IDB). We will examine previously collected data consisting of 94 semi-structured 10-min video observations of caregivers and their 18–24 month-old children in rural Tanna, Vanuatu and urban Vancouver, Canada to identify and compare the proportion of time caregivers spend engaging in IDS and IDB during these interactions, both within and between societies. We define IDS as caregiver speech or vocalisations during the interaction with the infant, and we define IDB as non-verbal behaviours that are produced with the infant during the interaction. This study aims to take a step towards a more generalised understanding of language development in children, moving beyond the urban and western societies in which our understanding of development is currently based, and the predicted results will aid in recognising different developmental pathways within multi-cultural communities.
{"title":"Infant-directed communication in Tanna, Vanuatu and Vancouver, Canada","authors":"Zahra Halavani, H. Henny Yeung, Senay Cebioğlu, Tanya Broesch","doi":"10.1002/icd.2498","DOIUrl":"10.1002/icd.2498","url":null,"abstract":"<p>It is known that infant-directed speech (IDS) plays a key role in language development. Previous research, however, has also identified significant variability across societies in terms of how often IDS occurs. For example, some studies report very little IDS in non-western, small-scale societies – including children growing up in small-scale societies in Tanna, Vanuatu. This is surprising given that IDS is widely assumed as a common feature of human caregiving based on research conducted in urbanised populations which are more well-studied. Here, we propose that IDS is only one of a suite of important caregiving behaviours that are produced during interactions with infants, which may vary by culture, perhaps being replaced by other, non-verbal infant-directed behaviours (IDB). We will examine previously collected data consisting of 94 semi-structured 10-min video observations of caregivers and their 18–24 month-old children in rural Tanna, Vanuatu and urban Vancouver, Canada to identify and compare the proportion of time caregivers spend engaging in IDS and IDB during these interactions, both within and between societies. We define IDS as caregiver speech or vocalisations during the interaction with the infant, and we define IDB as non-verbal behaviours that are produced with the infant during the interaction. This study aims to take a step towards a more generalised understanding of language development in children, moving beyond the urban and western societies in which our understanding of development is currently based, and the predicted results will aid in recognising different developmental pathways within multi-cultural communities.</p>","PeriodicalId":47820,"journal":{"name":"Infant and Child Development","volume":"33 4","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.8,"publicationDate":"2024-02-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/icd.2498","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"139922798","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
<p>It has been over 10 years since the replicability crisis and open science movement entered the mainstream of psychology (e.g., Simmons et al., <span>2011</span>). In that time, psychologists have been identifying and describing the nature of the problems with how we do our science (e.g., a lack of transparency, replicability and diversity) and debating proposed solutions for how to right the course. Two main themes emerged in this conversation: open science as a means to increase transparency and accountability and metascience as a way to identify sources of the observed problems by studying science with its own methods.</p><p>However, there seems to be an asymmetric focus across subfields within psychological sciences and previously, only a few papers examining developmental psychology existed. At the same time, the specific conditions of developmental research might make the field particularly vulnerable to findings that cannot form a solid basis for theorising, such as difficulty in recruiting populations leading to small samples and indirect tests leading to large amounts of noise (Davis-Kean & Ellis, <span>2019</span>; Frank et al., <span>2017</span>). Thus the field might be at risk of falling behind the latest developments in examining the process of generating knowledge with implications for theory, methods and measurement. This risk stands in contrast with existing open science traditions within developmental science, such as a rich history of data sharing (e.g., making language corpus data publicly available since 1984 on CHILDES; MacWhinney, <span>2000</span>) and the influential big team science collaboration ManyBabies (Frank et al., <span>2017</span>).</p><p>The purpose of this Special Issue was to provide a forum for work on metascience and open science within developmental psychology. We are very pleased to introduce 16 papers – a mix of empirical reports, commentaries, reviews, methodological articles and theoretical articles.</p><p>One of the barriers to adopting open science can be not knowing where to start (Kathawalla et al., <span>2021</span>). Luckily, this special issue includes several helpful ‘how-to’ guides! Kalandadze and Hart (<span>2022</span>) is a great place to start, with an annotated reading list on open developmental science. Turoman et al. (<span>2022</span>) present a workflow for applying open science principles in a developmental psychology lab, using their own lab as an example. Regarding data analysis, Visser et al. (<span>2023</span>) present a tutorial for using Bayesian sequential testing designs and Woods et al. (<span>2023</span>) present best practices for addressing missing data through multiple imputations.</p><p>Several articles address best practices when using different methodologies in developmental psychology. Two articles outline guidelines for applying open science practices to descriptive research (Kosie & Lew-Williams, <span>2022</span>) and longitudinal research (Petersen et a
以开放科学为重点的特刊历来对发展心理学的发展非常重要。事实上,Kalandadze 和 Hart(2022 年)的注释阅读清单中包含的两篇重要文章实际上来自《婴儿行为与发展》(Infant Behavior and Development,2019 年;Lundwall,2019 年)上一期关于 "婴儿研究中的可复制性、合作与最佳实践 "的特刊。同样,注册报告格式(Chambers & Tzavella, 2021)也通过特刊(Syed et al.我们希望以同样的方式,本期特刊中的文章日后将被视为思考和撰写发展心理学开放科学和元科学时的关键文章。从拥抱开放科学的实用 "如何做 "指南,到关于提高严谨性和解决可推广性问题的讨论,本期特刊的文章内容丰富,发人深省。在发展心理学不断发展的过程中,拥抱开放科学实践、提高方法论的严谨性、促进包容性和多样性对于该领域的持续发展和相关性至关重要。因此,我们希望这里提出的观点能够激励研究人员开展更加开放、严谨和包容的发展科学研究。
{"title":"Open science and metascience in developmental psychology: Introduction to the special issue","authors":"Priya Silverstein, Christina Bergmann, Moin Syed","doi":"10.1002/icd.2495","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1002/icd.2495","url":null,"abstract":"<p>It has been over 10 years since the replicability crisis and open science movement entered the mainstream of psychology (e.g., Simmons et al., <span>2011</span>). In that time, psychologists have been identifying and describing the nature of the problems with how we do our science (e.g., a lack of transparency, replicability and diversity) and debating proposed solutions for how to right the course. Two main themes emerged in this conversation: open science as a means to increase transparency and accountability and metascience as a way to identify sources of the observed problems by studying science with its own methods.</p><p>However, there seems to be an asymmetric focus across subfields within psychological sciences and previously, only a few papers examining developmental psychology existed. At the same time, the specific conditions of developmental research might make the field particularly vulnerable to findings that cannot form a solid basis for theorising, such as difficulty in recruiting populations leading to small samples and indirect tests leading to large amounts of noise (Davis-Kean & Ellis, <span>2019</span>; Frank et al., <span>2017</span>). Thus the field might be at risk of falling behind the latest developments in examining the process of generating knowledge with implications for theory, methods and measurement. This risk stands in contrast with existing open science traditions within developmental science, such as a rich history of data sharing (e.g., making language corpus data publicly available since 1984 on CHILDES; MacWhinney, <span>2000</span>) and the influential big team science collaboration ManyBabies (Frank et al., <span>2017</span>).</p><p>The purpose of this Special Issue was to provide a forum for work on metascience and open science within developmental psychology. We are very pleased to introduce 16 papers – a mix of empirical reports, commentaries, reviews, methodological articles and theoretical articles.</p><p>One of the barriers to adopting open science can be not knowing where to start (Kathawalla et al., <span>2021</span>). Luckily, this special issue includes several helpful ‘how-to’ guides! Kalandadze and Hart (<span>2022</span>) is a great place to start, with an annotated reading list on open developmental science. Turoman et al. (<span>2022</span>) present a workflow for applying open science principles in a developmental psychology lab, using their own lab as an example. Regarding data analysis, Visser et al. (<span>2023</span>) present a tutorial for using Bayesian sequential testing designs and Woods et al. (<span>2023</span>) present best practices for addressing missing data through multiple imputations.</p><p>Several articles address best practices when using different methodologies in developmental psychology. Two articles outline guidelines for applying open science practices to descriptive research (Kosie & Lew-Williams, <span>2022</span>) and longitudinal research (Petersen et a","PeriodicalId":47820,"journal":{"name":"Infant and Child Development","volume":"33 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.2,"publicationDate":"2024-02-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/icd.2495","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"139732296","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
The purpose of the current study was to qualitatively explore the home mathematical environment across two regions in two different countries (i.e., Cuba and Mexico), replicating a qualitative study previously conducted in Northern Ireland (NI), United Kingdom (Cahoon et al., 2017). Semi-structured interviews with parents/caregivers of children (3- to 5-year-olds) in both Mexico (n = 13) and Cuba (n = 40) were completed to investigate their views, experiences and attitudes towards the home mathematical environment. Thematic analysis was used to explore themes relevant to the home mathematical environment. Three consistent themes were found in the Mexican and Cuban data: Numeracy Environment Structure, Expectations and Attitudes and Views of Technology. Two unique themes were found in the Mexico data: Interactions Related to Reading or Mathematics, and Child's Attitudes in Relation to Mathematics. One unique theme was found in the Cuban interviews: Interactions for Learning. Although diverse themes were identified, consistencies were also observed. This suggests that some home numeracy practices may be universal in nature. This research increases the understanding of human development in context.
本研究旨在对两个不同国家(即古巴和墨西哥)两个地区的家庭数学环境进行定性探索,复制之前在英国北爱尔兰(NI)进行的一项定性研究(Cahoon et al.)对墨西哥(n = 13)和古巴(n = 40)儿童(3-5 岁)的父母/照顾者进行了半结构式访谈,以调查他们对家庭数学环境的看法、经验和态度。专题分析用于探讨与家庭数学环境相关的主题。在墨西哥和古巴的数据中发现了三个一致的主题:数学环境结构、期望和态度以及对技术的看法。在墨西哥的数据中发现了两个独特的主题:与阅读或数学有关的互动,以及儿童对数学的态度。古巴的访谈中有一个独特的主题:为学习而互动。虽然发现了不同的主题,但也观察到了一致性。这表明,一些家庭算术实践可能具有普遍性。这项研究加深了人们对人类发展背景的了解。
{"title":"Parents' views and experiences of the home mathematics environment: A cross-country study","authors":"Abbie Cahoon, Yanet Campver, Nancy Estévez, Carolina Jiménez Lira, Daniela Susana Paz García, Elia Veronica Benavides Pando, Victoria Simms","doi":"10.1002/icd.2497","DOIUrl":"10.1002/icd.2497","url":null,"abstract":"<p>The purpose of the current study was to qualitatively explore the home mathematical environment across two regions in two different countries (i.e., Cuba and Mexico), replicating a qualitative study previously conducted in Northern Ireland (NI), United Kingdom (Cahoon et al., 2017). Semi-structured interviews with parents/caregivers of children (3- to 5-year-olds) in both Mexico (<i>n</i> = 13) and Cuba (<i>n</i> = 40) were completed to investigate their views, experiences and attitudes towards the home mathematical environment. Thematic analysis was used to explore themes relevant to the home mathematical environment. Three consistent themes were found in the Mexican and Cuban data: Numeracy Environment Structure, Expectations and Attitudes and Views of Technology. Two unique themes were found in the Mexico data: Interactions Related to Reading or Mathematics, and Child's Attitudes in Relation to Mathematics. One unique theme was found in the Cuban interviews: Interactions for Learning. Although diverse themes were identified, consistencies were also observed. This suggests that some home numeracy practices may be universal in nature. This research increases the understanding of human development in context.</p>","PeriodicalId":47820,"journal":{"name":"Infant and Child Development","volume":"33 4","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.8,"publicationDate":"2024-02-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/icd.2497","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"139776745","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}