The Role of Interactional Quality in Learning from Touch Screens during Infancy: Context Matters

Abstract

Interactional quality has been shown to enhance learning during book reading and play, but has not been examined during touch screen use. Learning to apply knowledge from a touch screen is complex for infants because it involves transfer of learning between a two-dimensional (2D) screen and three-dimensional (3D) object in the physical world. This study uses a touch screen procedure to examine interactional quality measured via maternal structuring, diversity of maternal language, and dyadic emotional responsiveness and infant outcomes during a transfer of learning task. Fifty 15-month-old infants and their mothers participated in this semi-naturalistic teaching task. Mothers were given a 3D object, and a static image of the object presented on a touch screen. Mothers had 5 min to teach their infant that a button on the real toy works in the same way as a virtual button on the touch screen (or vice versa). Overall, 64% of infants learned how to make the button work, transferring learning from the touch screen to the 3D object or vice versa. Infants were just as successful in the 3D to 2D transfer direction as they were in the 2D to 3D transfer direction. A cluster analysis based on emotional responsiveness, the proportion of diverse maternal verbal input, and amount of maternal structuring resulted in two levels of interactional quality: high quality and moderate quality. A logistic regression revealed the level of interactional quality predicted infant transfer. Infants were 19 times more likely to succeed and transfer learning between the touch screen and real object if they were in a high interactional quality dyad, even after controlling for infant activity levels. The present findings suggest that interactional quality between mother and infant plays an important role in making touch screens effective teaching tools for infants’ learning.

Detailing the digital experience: Parent reports of children's media use in the home learning environment

“…This was a positive finding because joint media engagement, or sharing the screen media experience with a caregiver, improves meaning making and learning outcomes. Adults can scaffold the material and help children understand the content, and build on it to create future learning opportunities (Barr, Muentener, Garcia, Fujimoto, & Chávez, 2007;Neumann, 2017;Skouteris & Kelly, 2006;Takeuchi & Stevens, 2011;Zack & Barr, 2016;Zimmermann, Moser, Lee, Gerhardstein, & Barr, 2016).…”

YouTube viewers in diapers: An exploration of factors associated with amount of toddlers’ online viewing

“…Furthermore, constantly improving cognitive and motor skills enable toddlers to engage well with touchscreen devices and use them for online activities (Holloway et al, 2013;Kucirkova, 2011;Zack & Barr, 2016). Recent studies conducted in several European countries indicate that between 50% to 70% of children aged 3-6 use the internet on a regular basis and that video sharing sites are among the first that very young children visit (Holloway et al, 2013).…”

“…On the other hand, the variety of new formats and of intriguing and thought-provoking content available online might encourage parents to employ instructive mediation more often. So far, most empirical efforts have been devoted to issues concerning children's online safety (e.g., Hasebrink, Görzig, Haddon, Kalmus, & Livingstone, 2011;Livingstone et al, 2011), parental restrictions regarding children's internet use (e.g., Dürager, & Livingstone, 2012;Ofcom, 2014) and parent-child co-use of touchscreen devices (e.g., Zack & Barr, 2016;Zaman, Nouwen, Vanattenhoven, de Ferrerre, & Van Looy, 2016), whereas only a few studies have dealt directly with parental mediation of online viewing.…”

How self‐generated labelling shapes transfer of learning during early childhood: The role of individual differences

“…Under which experimental conditions is labelling most likely to occur? Multiple social factors have been reported to affect learning from media during early childhood, including social contingency (Myers, LeWitt, Gallo, & Maselli, ; Nielsen et al ., ; Roseberry, Hirsh‐Pasek, & Golinkoff, ; Troseth, Saylor, & Archer, ; Zimmermann et al ., ), social relevance of the on‐screen actor (Krcmar, ), and parental scaffolding (Strouse & Troseth, ; Zack & Barr, ). Why might the social context influence the likelihood of labelling?…”