Interactions 2 Reading Pdf Download
Tasha Feil
This article examines Gene x Environment (G x E) interactions in two comorbid developmental disorders--reading disability (RD) and attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD)--as a window on broader issues on G x E interactions in developmental psychology. The authors first briefly review types of G x E interactions, methods for detecting them, and challenges researchers confront in interpreting such interactions. They then review previous evidence for G x E interactions in RD and ADHD, the directions of which are opposite to each other: bioecological for RD and diathesis stress for ADHD. Given these results, the authors formulate and test predictions about G x E interactions that would be expected at the favorable end of each symptom dimension (e.g., above-average reading or attention). Consistent with their prediction, the authors found initial evidence for a resilience interaction for above-average reading: higher heritability in the presence of lower parental education. However, they did not find a G x E interaction at the favorable end of the ADHD symptom dimension. The authors conclude with implications for future research.
This study examined mother-child shared book reading behaviors before and after participation in a random-assignment responsive parenting intervention called Play and Learning Strategies (PALS) that occurred during infancy (PALS I), the toddler-preschool (PALS II) period, or both as compared with a developmental assessment (DAS) intervention (DAS I and/or II). The efficacy of PALS was previously demonstrated for improving mother and child behaviors within play contexts, everyday activities, and standardized measures of child language. We hypothesized that PALS effects would generalize to influence maternal and child behaviors during a shared reading task even though this situation was not a specific focus of the intervention and that this would be similar for children who varied in biological risk. Participation in at least PALS II was expected to have a positive effect due to children's increased capacity to engage in book reading at this age. Four groups of randomized mothers and their children (PALS I-II, PALS I-DAS II, DAS I-PALS II, DAS I-II) were observed in shared reading interactions during the toddler-preschool period and coded for (a) mother's affective and cognitive-linguistic supports and (b) child's responses to maternal requests and initiations. Support was found for significant changes in observed maternal and child behaviors, and evidence of mediation was found for the intervention to affect children's behaviors through change in maternal responsiveness behaviors. These results add to other studies supporting the importance of targeting a broad range of responsive behaviors across theoretical frameworks in interventions to facilitate children's development.
Bar graphs depict the proportion of children who ranked each robot in each place, i.e., 1st, 2nd, 3rd, (A) immediately upon viewing the inactive robots and (B) after viewing the short video demonstrations of the robots in action. Panel (C) summarizes the proportion of children who selected each robot as their reading buddy.
Taken together, this suggests that the zoomorphic MiRo robot was markedly less popular in this context, perhaps reflecting a reduced perceived capacity to engage in a reading task. It is of note that three of the four children who initially ranked MiRo first changed their preferences upon viewing the videos. By comparison, 6/16 children who initially ranked NAO first, and 5/9 children who ranked Cozmo first changed their preferences, after watching the video. Whilst the overall preference pattern remained stable across ranking opportunities, 47% of children changed their first preferences after watching the videos, suggesting that both aesthetic form and function play a role in shaping first impressions and expectations.
Finally, it is important to note that the insights gained from the current study on the application of social robots as reading and learning companions may not generalise to older children and adults since perceptions of robots have been shown to change with development, possibly as the ability and tendency to attribute mental states to others matures. For instance, Brink and colleagues37 have shown that younger children (
(A) Schematic depiction of laboratory layout. (B) Photograph of child model reading with a robot. Photo of model depicted used with the informed consent of the child and their parents. This child was not a participant in the current study.
We administered screening tests for reading and anxiety to characterise our sample and contextualise their reflections following the reading activity. See Table 2 for a full summary of participant scores on these measures.
Many thanks to Bishakha Chaudhury for fruitful early discussions about the Reading with Robots project, Genevieve McArthur and Deanna Francis who offered feedback and advice on the protocol for assessing reading fluency and anxiety, and to Kristina Haira who assisted with data entry and interview transcription.
Explore reading basics as well as the key role of background knowledge and motivation in becoming a lifelong reader and learner. Watch our PBS Launching Young Readers series and try our self-paced Reading 101 course to deepen your understanding.
Before reading a book about sharks, the teacher asked the students to tell what they knew about the commonly feared creatures. The teacher was momentarily surprised when one student said that her older sister had swum with sharks. Fortunately, the teacher followed up with more discussion.
Jiménez, R.T., García, G.E., & Pearson, P.D. (1996). The reading strategies of bilingual Latina/o students who are successful English readers: Opportunities and obstacles. Reading Research Quarterly, 31, 90-112.
Kasten, W.C. (1997). Learning is noisy: The myth of silence in the reading-writing classroom. In J.R. Paratore & R.L. McCormack (Eds.), Peer talk in the classroom: Learning from research (pp. 88-101). Newark, DE: International Reading Association.
That's according to a new study from the University of Iowa that looked at how mothers responded to their 12-month-olds during book reading, puppet play, and toy play. What researchers found is the babies made more speech-like sounds during reading than when playing with puppets or toys. They also discovered mothers were more responsive to these types of sounds while reading to their child than during the other activities.
"A lot of research shows that book reading even to infants as young as six months of age is important to language outcomes, but I'm trying to explain why by looking at the specifics, which could be responding to speech-like sounds," says Julie Gros-Louis, assistant professor of psychology at the UI and corresponding author on the study, published in January in Language Learning and Development.
"If we know what specific interactions are occurring between caregiver and child and we can link that to language outcomes, then it wouldn't just be telling parents, 'Read a lot of books to your kids,'" Gros-Louis adds. "That would definitely be important to tell them, but you could also identify specific behaviors to do during book reading."
The study also found that no matter the context, mothers' responses to speech-like sounds were often imitations or an expansion of the sound. For example, if the baby said, "Ba," the mother would respond with "Ba-ba" or "Ball," even if it had nothing to do with the story being read. Mothers frequently provided labels during reading, too.
Gros-Louis says she used mothers and their babies for this study because their interactions have been studied more than those between fathers and their children. Thus, she could more readily compare her findings to past studies.
In this case, researchers observed the interactions of 34 mothers and their 12-month-olds during three 10-minute periods of different activities: puppet play, toy play, and book reading. The hand puppet was a cloth monkey; the toy was a Fisher-Price barn with manipulative parts, such as buttons to push and knobs to turn; and the books had bright pictures and simple sentences rather than single words or labels. The babies were seated in a high chair to control proximity to their mothers and to prevent them from getting up and moving around the play room.
"The current findings can contribute to understanding how reading to preverbal infants is associated with language outcomes, which is not well understood in contrast to reading interactions with older toddlers," according to the study.
You can also enable activity limitations on all repositories owned by your personal account or an organization. If a user-wide or organization-wide limit is enabled, you can't limit activity for individual repositories owned by the account. For more information, see "Limiting interactions for your personal account" and "Limiting interactions in your organization."
Interpersonal interactions involve exchange of turns when people alternate roles speaking and listening to each other. In these situations, to perform successfully as a listener you need to engage in multiple tasks simultaneously. You need to:
Print referencing (i.e., use of verbal and nonverbal cues about the forms and characteristics of the print) during SBR has long-term benefits on literacy skills (Piasta et al., 2012). This includes strategies such as orienting the child to print organization (e.g., the title of the book, direction of print), focusing on print meaning (e.g., function of print, linking illustrations to text), focusing on letters (e.g., identifying sounds and letters), and focusing on words (e.g., tracking the words while reading; identifying letters in words) (Justice et al., 2008). It is interesting to note, in a study of 42 Taiwanese mother-child dyads, mothers most frequently discussed book knowledge (e.g., this is the front page) and seldom discussed print knowledge (e.g., this word is go), word meaning and usage (e.g., look at its mouth that is used for eating), or performing the action of book reading with their young children (Chang et al., 2016).
aa06259810