Callanan Maureen A, Legare Cristine H, Sobel David M, Jaeger Garrett J, Letourneau Susan, McHugh Sam R, Willard Aiyana, Brinkman Aurora, Finiasz Zoe, Rubio Erika, Barnett Adrienne, Gose Robin, Martin Jennifer L, Meisner Robin, Watson Janella
Department of Psychology, University of California, Santa Cruz.
Department of Psychology, University of Texas.
Monogr Soc Res Child Dev. 2020 Mar;85(1):7-137. doi: 10.1111/mono.12412.
Young children develop causal knowledge through everyday family conversations and activities. Children's museums are an informative setting for studying the social context of causal learning because family members engage together in everyday scientific thinking as they play in museums. In this multisite collaborative project, we investigate children's developing causal thinking in the context of family interaction at museum exhibits. We focus on explaining and exploring as two fundamental collaborative processes in parent-child interaction, investigating how families explain and explore in open-ended collaboration at gear exhibits in three children's museums in Providence, RI, San Jose, CA, and Austin, TX. Our main research questions examined (a) how open-ended family exploration and explanation relate to one another to form a dynamic for children's learning; (b) how that dynamic differs for families using different interaction styles, and relates to contextual factors such as families' science background, and (c) how that dynamic predicts children's independent causal thinking when given more structured tasks. We summarize findings on exploring, explaining, and parent-child interaction (PCI) styles. We then present findings on how these measures related to one another, and finally how that dynamic predicts children's causal thinking. In studying children's exploring we described two types of behaviors of importance for causal thinking: (a) Systematic Exploration: Connecting gears to form a gear machine followed by spinning the gear machine. (b) Resolute Behavior: Problem-solving behaviors, in which children attempted to connect or spin a particular set of gears, hit an obstacle, and then persisted to succeed (as opposed to moving on to another behavior). Older children engaged in both behaviors more than younger children, and the proportion of these behaviors were correlated with one another. Parents and children talked to each other while interacting with the exhibits. We coded causal language, as well as other types of utterances. Parents' causal language predicted children's causal language, independent of age. The proportion of parents' causal language also predicted the proportion of children's systematic exploration. Resolute behavior on the part of children did not correlate with parents' causal language, but did correlate with children's own talk about actions and the exhibit. We next considered who set goals for the play in a more holistic measure of parent-child interaction style, identifying dyads as parent-directed, child-directed, or jointly-directed in their interaction with one another. Children in different parent-child interaction styles engaged in different amounts of systematic exploration and had parents who engaged in different amounts of causal language. Resolute behavior and the language related to children engaging in such troubleshooting, seemed more consistent across the three parent-child interaction styles. Using general linear mixed modeling, we considered relations within sequences of action and talk. We found that the timing of parents' causal language was crucial to whether children engaged in systematic exploration. Parents' causal talk was a predictor of children's systematic exploration only if it occurred prior to the act of spinning the gears (while children were building gear machines). We did not observe an effect of causal language when it occurred concurrently with or after children's spinning. Similarly, children's talk about their actions and the exhibit predicted their resolute behavior, but only when the talk occurred while the child was encountering the problem. No effects were found for models where the talk happened concurrently or after resolving the problem. Finally, we considered how explaining and exploring related to children's causal thinking. We analyzed measures of children's causal thinking about gears and a free play measure with a novel set of gears. Principal component analysis revealed a latent factor of causal thinking in these measures. Structural equation modeling examined how parents' background in science related to children's systematic exploration, parents' causal language, and parent-child interaction style, and then how those factors predicted children's causal thinking. In a full model, with children's age and gender included, children's systematic exploration related to children's causal thinking. Overall, these data demonstrate that children's systematic exploration and parents' causal explanation are best studied in relation to one another, because both contributed to children's learning while playing at a museum exhibit. Children engaged in systematic exploration, which supported their causal thinking. Parents' causal talk supported children's exploration when it was presented at certain times during the interaction. In contrast, children's persistence in problem solving was less sensitive to parents' talk or interaction style, and more related to children's own language, which may act as a form of self-explanation. We discuss the findings in light of ongoing approaches to promote the benefit of parent-child interaction during play for children's learning and problem solving. We also examine the implications of these findings for formal and informal learning settings, and for theoretical integration of constructivist and sociocultural approaches in the study of children's causal thinking.
幼儿通过日常家庭对话和活动来发展因果知识。儿童博物馆是研究因果学习社会背景的一个信息丰富的场所,因为家庭成员在博物馆游玩时会一起参与日常科学思考。在这个多地点合作项目中,我们研究了儿童在博物馆展品的家庭互动背景下因果思维的发展。我们将解释和探索作为亲子互动中的两个基本合作过程,研究家庭在罗德岛州普罗维登斯、加利福尼亚州圣何塞和德克萨斯州奥斯汀的三个儿童博物馆的齿轮展品处进行开放式合作时是如何解释和探索的。我们的主要研究问题包括:(a)开放式家庭探索和解释如何相互关联以形成儿童学习的动态过程;(b)这种动态过程对于使用不同互动方式的家庭有何不同,以及与家庭科学背景等情境因素有何关联;(c)当给予更结构化的任务时,这种动态过程如何预测儿童的独立因果思维。我们总结了关于探索、解释和亲子互动(PCI)方式的研究结果。然后我们展示了这些测量指标如何相互关联,最后展示了这种动态过程如何预测儿童的因果思维。在研究儿童的探索时,我们描述了两种对因果思维很重要的行为:(a)系统探索:连接齿轮以形成齿轮机器,然后转动齿轮机器。(b)坚定行为:解决问题的行为,即儿童试图连接或转动特定的一组齿轮,遇到障碍,然后坚持直至成功(与转向另一种行为相反)。年龄较大的儿童比年龄较小的儿童更多地参与这两种行为,并且这些行为的比例相互关联。父母和孩子在与展品互动时会相互交谈。我们对因果语言以及其他类型的话语进行了编码。父母的因果语言可以预测儿童的因果语言,且不受年龄影响。父母因果语言的比例也可以预测儿童系统探索的比例。儿童的坚定行为与父母的因果语言没有相关性,但与儿童自己关于行动和展品的谈话相关。接下来,我们从更全面的亲子互动方式角度考虑谁为游戏设定目标,将二元组确定为在彼此互动中由父母主导、由孩子主导或共同主导。处于不同亲子互动方式的儿童进行的系统探索量不同,其父母使用的因果语言量也不同。坚定行为以及与儿童进行此类故障排除相关的语言,在三种亲子互动方式中似乎更为一致。使用一般线性混合模型,我们考虑了行动和谈话序列中的关系。我们发现父母因果语言的时机对于儿童是否进行系统探索至关重要。只有当父母的因果谈话在转动齿轮的行为之前发生(即当孩子在构建齿轮机器时),它才是儿童系统探索的一个预测指标。当因果语言与儿童转动齿轮同时发生或在其之后发生时,我们没有观察到其影响。同样,儿童关于自己行动和展品的谈话可以预测他们的坚定行为,但前提是谈话发生在孩子遇到问题时。对于谈话在解决问题时或之后发生的模型,未发现有影响。最后,我们考虑了解释和探索与儿童因果思维的关系。我们分析了儿童对齿轮的因果思维测量指标以及使用一组新齿轮进行自由玩耍的测量指标。主成分分析揭示了这些测量指标中因果思维的一个潜在因素。结构方程建模研究了父母的科学背景如何与儿童的系统探索、父母的因果语言以及亲子互动方式相关,然后这些因素如何预测儿童的因果思维。在一个包含儿童年龄和性别的完整模型中,儿童的系统探索与儿童的因果思维相关。总体而言,这些数据表明,儿童的系统探索和父母的因果解释最好相互关联地进行研究,因为两者都有助于儿童在博物馆展品处玩耍时的学习。儿童进行系统探索,这支持了他们的因果思维。父母的因果谈话在互动过程中的特定时间呈现时,支持了儿童的探索。相比之下,儿童在解决问题时的坚持对父母的谈话或互动方式不太敏感,更多地与儿童自己的语言相关,而这可能起到一种自我解释的作用。我们根据当前促进亲子互动在儿童学习和解决问题方面益处的方法来讨论这些发现。我们还研究了这些发现对正式和非正式学习环境的影响,以及对儿童因果思维研究中建构主义和社会文化方法理论整合的影响。