Forgetting and symbolic insight: Delay improves children's use of a novel symbol

Touchscreens for Whom? Working Memory and Age Moderate the Impact of Contingency on Toddlers' Transfer From Video

Toddlers exhibit poor transfer between video and real-world contexts. Contingently responsive video such as that found in touchscreen apps appears to assist transfer for some toddlers but not others. This study investigated the extent to which toddlers' working memory moderates the impact of contingency on toddler's transfer of learning from video. Toddlers (24–36 months; N = 134) watched a hiding event on either (a) contingent video that advanced only after touch input or (b) non-contingent video that proceeded automatically. Toddlers then searched for a corresponding object on a felt board. Additionally, toddlers' working memory (WM) was assessed. Findings indicate WM and age moderated the impact of contingency on transfer: Contingency decreased transfer in younger children while increasing transfer among older children. However, this was only true for children with relatively low WM. Contingency had little impact on transfer among children with relatively high WM, regardless of age. Results from this study suggest that WM is one specific moderator that predicts whether toddlers are likely to learn from contingent vs. non-contingent video, yet WM does not operate in isolation. Together, these findings underscore the importance of considering multiple child characteristics when identifying the optimal conditions for toddlers' learning from symbolic media.

Executive Functioning and External Symbols: The Role of Symbolic Understanding and Psychological Distancing

Preschool children can use external symbols to aid their executive functioning (EF). The purpose of the current study was to investigate how symbols boost EF, specifically investigating the role of psychological distancing and symbolic understanding. Preschoolers were assessed on their level of symbolic understanding and completed two EF tasks. Half the children completed the first EF task using symbols, and all children completed the second EF task without the aid of symbols. Results indicated that children in the symbol group at first did significantly worse while they were using the symbols compared to the control group, though their performance improved over time. Control group performance was significantly worse in the second EF task. Symbolic understanding was sometimes related to EF performance for children in the symbol group but not the control group. The current research highlights the complexity of symbol use to influence cognitive functioning.