Boston College.
University of Portsmouth.
Child Dev. 2018 Nov;89(6):e594-e603. doi: 10.1111/cdev.13115. Epub 2018 Jul 10.
This article examines the parent intervention program evaluated by Weber et al. (2017) and argues that there are scientific and ethical problems with such intervention efforts in applied developmental science. Scientifically, these programs rely on data from a small and narrow sample of the world's population; assume the existence of fixed developmental pathways; and pit scientific knowledge against indigenous knowledge. The authors question the critical role of talk as solely providing the rich cognitive stimulation important to school success, and the critical role of primary caregivers as teachers of children's verbal competency. Ethically, these programs do not sufficiently explore how an intervention in one aspect of child care will affect the community's culturally organized patterns of child care.
本文考察了 Weber 等人（2017）评估的家长干预计划，并认为在应用发展科学中，此类干预措施存在科学和伦理问题。从科学角度来看，这些计划依赖于来自世界人口中一小部分且范围狭窄的样本数据；假设存在固定的发展途径；并将科学知识与本土知识相对立。作者质疑将谈话作为唯一提供对学校成功至关重要的丰富认知刺激的关键作用，以及主要照顾者作为儿童语言能力教师的关键作用。从伦理角度来看，这些计划没有充分探讨对儿童保育某一方面的干预将如何影响社区中文化组织的儿童保育模式。
