Parents explain more often to boys than to girls during shared scientific thinking

Young children's everyday scientific thinking often occurs in the context of parent-child interactions. In a study of naturally occurring family conversation, parents were three times more likely to explain science to boys than to girls while using interactive science exhibits in a museum. This difference in explanation occurred despite the fact that parents were equally likely to talk to their male and female children about how to use the exhibits and about the evidence generated by the exhibits. The findings suggest that parents engaged in informal science activities with their children may be unintentionally contributing to a gender gap in children's scientific literacy well before children encounter formal science instruction in grade school.

Learning words through overhearing

Recent research indicates that toddlers can monitor others' conversations, raising the possibility that they can acquire vocabulary in this way. Three studies examined 2-year-olds' (N = 88) ability to learn novel words when overhearing these words used by others. Children aged 2,6 were equally good at learning novel words-both object labels and action verbs-when they were overhearers as when they were directly addressed. For younger 2-year-olds (2,1), this was true for object labels, but the results were less clear for verbs. The findings demonstrate that 2-year-olds can acquire novel words from overheard speech, and highlight the active role played by toddlers in vocabulary acquisition.

Labels and explanations in mother-child emotion talk: age and gender differentiation

Mothers' and preschoolers' emotion talk was examined for age- (2, 3, and 4 years) and gender-related patterns in the use of labels and explanations. Although labels directly refer to emotions, explanations link emotion words to causal information. Children used emotion words mainly in labels. Boys' emotion talk showed an age increase; in contrast, the youngest group of girls talked about emotion much more frequently than did same-age boys, and this high frequency remained relatively stable across age. Mothers used more explanations than labels in emotion talk to boys but used similar amounts with girls. Further, their use of labels and explanations related to individual differences in the extent to which children talked about emotion. These findings are discussed in terms of language socialization--in particular, processes related to the socialization of emotion language and gender.

Metarepresentation in action: 3-, 4-, and 5-year-olds' developing theories of mind in parent-child conversations

Using a cross-sectional natural language database, the authors investigated the parent-child conversations of 36 three-, 4-, and 5-year-olds to explore 2 issues regarding the development of metarepresentation. First, children's uses of explicit contrastives (ECs)--utterances that explicitly contrast 2 differing mental states--were explored. Four-year-olds and, to a greater extent, 5-year-olds were found to reliably use ECs. Second, parents' responses to children's uses of "I don't know" and implicit contrastives (e.g., contradictions) were examined to determine whether parents took these opportunities to highlight the representational nature of mental states. All children regularly elicited mentalistic responses from their parents and, in some cases, these parental responses were positively related to children's production of mental talk. Findings are discussed in terms of how theory of mind development may be guided by scaffolding processes.

Exploration, Explanation, and Parent-Child Interaction in Museums

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.

Family Science Talk in Museums: Predicting Children's Engagement From Variations in Talk and Activity

Children's developing reasoning skills are better understood within the context of their social and cultural lives. As part of a research-museum partnership, this article reports a study exploring science-relevant conversations of 82 families, with children between 3 and 11 years, while visiting a children's museum exhibit about mammoth bones, and in a focused one-on-one exploration of a "mystery object." Parents' use of a variety of types of science talk predicted children's conceptual engagement in the exhibit, but interestingly, different types of parent talk predicted children's engagement depending on the order of the two activities. The findings illustrate the importance of studying children's thinking in real-world contexts and inform creation of effective real-world science experiences for children and families.

Multiple Labels for Objects in Conversations With Young Children: Parents' Language and Children's Developing Expectations About Word Meanings

Children sometimes seem to expect words to have mutually exclusive meanings in certain contexts of early word learning. In 2 studies, 12- to 24-month-old children and their parents were videotaped as they engaged in conversations while playing with sets of toys (sea creatures, vehicles, doll clothing) in free-play, storytelling, and categorization contexts. In both studies, parents demonstrated a reliable preference to provide just 1 label for a given object. Importantly, parents' violations of this preference were usually accompanied by clarifying (or "bridging") information that either indicated the relation between the 2 labels or suggested that 1 of the labels was appropriate. Further, in some contexts, parents' tendency to use multiple labels and to provide bridging information for multiple labels was correlated with children's productive vocabulary. It is argued that these findings support a socio-pragmatic hypothesis about the origins of children's early beliefs about word meanings.

Parents' science talk to their children in Mexican-descent families residing in the USA

Everyday parent—child conversations may support children's scientific understanding. The types and frequency of parent—child science talk may vary with the cultural and schooling background of the participants, and yet most research in the USA focuses on highly schooled European-American families. This study investigated 40 Mexican-descent parents' science talk with their children (mean age = 5 years 7 months, range = 2 years 10 months to 8 years 6 months). Parents were divided between a higher schooling group who had completed secondary school, and a basic schooling group who had fewer than 12 years of formal schooling. Parents and children were videotaped engaging with science exhibits at a children's museum and at home. Conversations were coded in terms of parents' explanatory talk. In both contexts, Mexican-descent parents engaged children in explanatory science talk. At the museum, parents in the higher schooling group used more causal explanations, scientific principles explanations, and encouraging predictions types of explanations than did parents in the basic schooling group. By contrast, the only difference at home was that parents in the higher schooling group used more encouraging predictions talk than parents in the basic schooling group. Parents who had been to museums used more explanations than parents who had never visited a museum. The results suggest that while explanatory speech differed somewhat in two groups of Mexican-descent parents varying in formal schooling, all of these children from Mexican-descent families experienced some conversations that were relevant for their developing science literacy.

Why things happen: teleological explanation in parent-child conversations

Research indicates that young children, unlike adults, have a generalized tendency to view not only artifacts but also living and nonliving natural phenomena as existing for a purpose. To further understand this tendency's origin, the authors explored parents' propensity to invoke teleological explanation during explanatory conversations with their children. Over 2 weeks, Mexican-descent mothers were interviewed about question-answer exchanges with their preschool children. Analyses revealed that children asked more about biological and social phenomena than about artifacts or nonliving natural phenomena, with most questions ambiguous as to whether they were requests for causal or teleological explanations. In responding to these ambiguous questions, parents generally invoked causal rather than teleological explanations. The tendency to favor causal explanation was confirmed by analyses of transcripts from a longitudinal study of spontaneous speech in a father-son dyad. These results suggest that children's bias toward teleological explanation does not straightforwardly derive from parent explanation.

Mother-child conversation and children's understanding of biological and nonbiological changes in size

This article explores the ways that mothers and children from primarily middle-income European American backgrounds reason about events in which biological and nonbiological objects change in size. In Study 1, mother-child conversations were examined to investigate the events mothers described as growth, as well as the ways mothers explained events occurring in different domains. Findings indicate that although mothers primarily discussed events in domain-specific ways, they exhibited some domain blurring in their talk to children. In Study 2, 3-year-old children (M = 3 years, 2 months) and 5-year-old children (M = 5 years) provided descriptions and explanations of the same events. Results suggest that preschool children have begun to develop domain-specific understandings. Results are discussed in light of the role that social interaction plays in children's conceptual development.

Generic language in scientific communication

Scientific communication poses a challenge: To clearly highlight key conclusions and implications while fully acknowledging the limitations of the evidence. Although these goals are in principle compatible, the goal of conveying complex and variable data may compete with reporting results in a digestible form that fits (increasingly) limited publication formats. As a result, authors' choices may favor clarity over complexity. For example, generic language (e.g., "Introverts and extraverts require different learning environments") may mislead by implying general, timeless conclusions while glossing over exceptions and variability. Using generic language is especially problematic if authors overgeneralize from small or unrepresentative samples (e.g., exclusively Western, middle-class). We present 4 studies examining the use and implications of generic language in psychology research articles. Study 1, a text analysis of 1,149 psychology articles published in 11 journals in 2015 and 2016, examined the use of generics in titles, research highlights, and abstracts. We found that generics were ubiquitously used to convey results (89% of articles included at least 1 generic), despite that most articles made no mention of sample demographics. Generics appeared more frequently in shorter units of the paper (i.e., highlights more than abstracts), and generics were not associated with sample size. Studies 2 to 4 (n = 1,578) found that readers judged results expressed with generic language to be more important and generalizable than findings expressed with nongeneric language. We highlight potential unintended consequences of language choice in scientific communication, as well as what these choices reveal about how scientists think about their data.

Conversations with mothers and siblings: young children's semantic and conceptual development

This study compared teaching and learning measures of 16 mother-child and sibling dyads playing a picture categorization game. Target children (mean age = 3 years 11 months) participated in 2 separate sessions, 1 with their mother and 1 with their older sibling (mean age = 6 years 11 months). Although siblings' teaching styles directed target children to make the correct choices, mothers provided information to help target children make choices on their own. Mothers labeled objects and categories more than siblings. Although target children scored higher with siblings than with mothers, this was because siblings categorized about half of the pictures themselves. Target children labeled objects and categories more with mothers than with siblings. These findings suggest important differences in how mothers and siblings interpreted the goals of the task, offering target children different teaching styles from which to learn.

Links between parents' epistemological stance and children's evidence talk

Recent experimental research highlights young children's selectivity in learning from others. Little is known, however, about the patterns of information that children actually encounter in conversations with adults. This study investigated variation in parents' tendency to focus on testable evidence as a way to answer science-related questions (e.g., causes of climate change, extinction of species) and asked whether this is related to children's own use of evidence in conversation. Parents read a science-themed book with their 4- to 8-year-old children. Guided by D. Kuhn's framework of epistemological stances, we coded (a) parents' expressions of epistemology-related information (e.g., using evidence to reason about an opinion, appealing to statements of fact that do not need evidence, or pointing out that knowing for sure may not be possible) while discussing four science-related topics and (b) children's comments about evidence for two different science-related topics. We found variation in parents' expressions of epistemological information by children's age and gender for particular topics. Also, parents' expressions of evaluativist epistemology (expressing the value of reasoning with evidence) were correlated with children's talk about evidence. To the extent that children experience different conversational environments, they may seek different types of answers to questions, become familiar with different ways of thinking about "knowing," and develop different strategies for being selective about learning from the testimony of others.

The Role of Educational Background, Activity, and Past Experiences in Mexican-Descent Families’ Science Conversations

Debate exists regarding the extent to which Mexican-descent parent-child conversations are explanatory. Moreover, suggestions have been made that differences in the amount of explanatory conversation may be based on parents’educational background. This article reports on two studies investigating conversations between parents and children in two different contexts. Results of an observational study conducted at a children’s museum reveal that although parents with high levels of formal education used more explanations about science than did parents with lower levels of formal education, both groups engaged in causal conversations with their children. In a second study examining parents’ reports of science talk after attending family science workshops, results indicated no difference in the explanation frequency between two groups of families with different levels of formal education. Overall, the findings suggest that Mexican-descent parents across differing educational backgrounds encourage their children’s developing understanding of the scientific world.

Cognitive development, culture, and conversation: comments on Harris and Koenig's "truth in testimony: how children learn about science and religion"

Harris and Koenig make a compelling case for the importance of adult "testimony" and its influence on children's developing conceptions of topics in science and religion. This commentary considers how their analysis relates to constructivist and sociocultural theories and discusses several ways in which Harris and Koenig's arguments help to debunk some prevalent assumptions about research on the social context of cognitive development. Finally, a number of additional issues are raised for debate and discussion, and some critiques and suggestions for future research are discussed. The issues discussed by Harris and Koenig are crucial if we are to take seriously the importance of culture in cognitive development.