A METHODOLOGICAL APPROACH TO THE INVESTIGATION OF LANGUAGE FLEXIBILITY IN PRESCHOOLERS: THE ROLE OF TOYS AND PARENTAL BELIEFS
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.24193/subbpsyped.2021.1.03Keywords:
play, toy type, language flexibility, parental beliefs, preschoolersAbstract
The aim of the present study was to investigate the influence of the toy-type and parental beliefs about play in the development and use of language in a flexible manner by preschool children. Namely, we defined language flexibility as the ability to use multiple labels for the same object, in response to a particular verbal context. Children’s language flexibility was evaluated with a newly-designed task that comprised several story-like situations in which the main character needed the child’s help to solve a problem. The main results failed to prove a statistically significant difference between the two groups of children in the language flexibility task. But the performance on the language flexibility task was positively and significantly associated with some free time activities that children are frequently involved in and with parent’s willingness to let their children play with a toy in a different way than its prescribed mode. In contrast, the frequency and time spent by the child watching TV or playing on the computer was negatively and significantly associated with the performance on the language flexibility task. As a conclusion, we discussed the current results side by side with some proposals regarding both methodological improvements on the current experimental procedure and future research attempts at investigating language development and language flexibility of preschoolers.References
Ban, M., & Uchiyama, I. (2020). Developmental changes in toy preferences during pretend play in toddlerhood. Early Child Development and Care, 1-10.
Clemens, L. F., & Kegel, C. A. (2021). Unique contribution of shared book reading on adult-child language interaction. Journal of Child Language, 48(2), 373-386.
Deak, G. O. (2003). The development of cognitive flexibility and language abilities. Advances in child development and behavior, 31, 273-328.
Dore, R. A., Zosh, J. M., Hirsh-Pasek, K., & Golinkoff, R. M. (2017). Plugging into word learning: the role of electronic toys and digital media in language development. In Cognitive Development in Digital Contexts (pp. 75-91). Academic Press
Ewin, C. A., Reupert, A., McLean, L. A., & Ewin, C. J. (2021). Mobile devices compared to non-digital toy play: The impact of activity type on the quality and quantity of parent language. Computers in Human Behavior, 118, 106669.
Healey, A., & Mendelsohn, A. (2019). Selecting appropriate toys for young children in the digital era. Pediatrics, 143(1), e20183348.
Hollich, G., Hirsh‐Pasek, K., & Golinkoff, R. M. (2000). I. What Does it Take to Learn a Word? Monographs of the society for research in child development, 65(3), 1-16.
Leaper, C., & Gleason, J. B. (1996). The relationship of play activity and gender to parent and child sex-typed communication. International Journal of Behavioral Development, 19(4), 689-703.
Liu, L., Escudero, P., Quattropani, C., & Robbins, R. A. (2020). Factors affecting infant toy preferences: Age, gender, experience, motor development, and parental attitude. Infancy, 25(5), 593-617.
Miller, J. L., Lossia, A., Suarez-Rivera, C., & Gros-Louis, J. (2017). Toys that squeak: Toy type impacts quality and quantity of parent–child interactions. First Language, 37(6), 630-647.
Namy, L. L. (2001). What's in a name when it isn't a word? 17‐month‐olds' mapping of nonverbal symbols to object categories. Infancy, 2(1), 73-86.
Namy, L. L., & Waxman, S. R. (1998). Words and gestures: Infants' interpretations of different forms of symbolic reference. Child development, 69(2), 295-308.
Namy, L. L., Campbell, A. L., & Tomasello, M. (2004). The changing role of iconicity in non-verbal symbol learning: A U-shaped trajectory in the acquisition of arbitrary gestures. Journal of Cognition and Development, 5(1), 37-57.
O'Brien, M., & Nagle, K. J. (1987). Parents' speech to toddlers: The effect of play context. Journal of Child Language, 14(2), 269-279.
Poole, D. A., Nunez, N., & Warren, A. (2007). The story of human development. Pearson/Prentice Hall.
Sosa, A. V. (2016). Association of the type of toy used during play with the quantity and quality of parent-infant communication. JAMA pediatrics, 170(2), 132-137.
Taggart, J., Becker, I., Rauen, J., Al Kallas, H., & Lillard, A. S. (2020). What Shall We Do: Pretend or Real? Preschoolers’ Choices and Parents’ Perceptions. Journal of Cognition and Development, 21(2), 261-281.
Thom, E. E., & Sandhofer, C. M. (2009). More is more: the relationship between vocabulary size and word extension. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 104(4), 466-473
Thom, E. E., & Sandhofer, C. M. (2014). How symbolic experience shapes children's symbolic flexibility. Child development, 85(2), 738-754.
Woodward, A., & Hoyne, K. (1999). Infants' learning about words and sounds in relation to objects. Child development, 70(1), 65-77.
Wooldridge, M. B., & Shapka, J. (2012). Playing with technology: Mother–toddler interaction scores lower during play with electronic toys. Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology, 33(5), 211-218.
Zosh, J. M., Verdine, B. N., Filipowicz, A., Golinkoff, R. M., Hirsh‐Pasek, K., & Newcombe, N. S. (2015). Talking shape: parental language with electronic versus traditional shape sorters. Mind, Brain, and Education, 9(3), 136-144.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2021 Studia Universitatis Babeș-Bolyai Psychologia-Paedagogia
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
