Effects of Facilitation vs. Exhibit Labels on Caregiver-Child Interactions at a Museum Exhibit.

In museum settings, caregivers support children's learning as they explore and interact with exhibits. Museums have developed exhibit design and facilitation strategies for promoting families' exploration and inquiry, but these strategies have rarely been contrasted. The goal of the current study was to investigate how prompts offered through staff facilitation vs. labels printed on exhibit components affected how family groups explored a circuit blocks exhibit, particularly whether children set and worked toward their own goals, and how caregivers were involved in children's play. We compared whether children, their caregivers, or both set goals as they played together, and the actions they each took to connect the circuits. We found little difference in how families set goals between the two conditions, but did find significant differences in caregivers' actions, with caregivers in the facilitation condition making fewer actions to connect circuits while using the exhibit, compared to caregivers in the exhibit labels condition. The findings suggest that facilitated and written prompts shape the quality of caregiver-child interactions in distinct ways.

Relations between parent-child interaction and children's engagement and learning at a museum exhibit about electric circuits.

Play is critical for children's learning, but there is significant disagreement over whether and how parents should guide children's play. The objective of the current study was to examine how parent-child interaction affected children's engagement and problem-solving behaviors when challenged with similar tasks. Parents and 4- to 7-year-old children in the U.S. (N = 111 dyads) played together at an interactive electric circuit exhibit in a children's museum. We examined how parents and children set and accomplished goals while playing with the exhibit materials. Children then participated in a set of challenges that involved completing increasingly difficult circuits. Children whose parents set goals for their interactions showed less engagement with the challenge task (choosing to attempt fewer challenges), and children whose parents were more active in completing the circuits while families played with the exhibit subsequently completed fewer challenges on their own. We discuss these results in light of broader findings on the role of parent-child interaction in museum settings.

Children's descriptions of playing and learning as related processes.

Many studies have examined children's understanding of playing and learning as separate concepts, but the ways that children relate playing and learning to one another remain relatively unexplored. The current study asked 5- to 8-year-olds (N = 92) to define playing and learning, and examined whether children defined them as abstract processes or merely as labels for particular types of activities. We also asked children to state whether playing and learning can occur simultaneously, and examined whether they could give examples of playing and learning with attributes either congruent or incongruent with those activities. Older children were more likely to define both playing and learning in terms of abstract processes, rather than by describing particular topics or activities. Children who defined both playing and learning in this way were able to generate more examples of situations where they were simultaneously playing and learning, and were better able to generate examples of learning with characteristics of play, and examples of playing with characteristics of learning. These data suggest that children develop an understanding that learning and playing can coincide. These results are critical to researchers and educators who seek to integrate play and learning, as children's beliefs about these concepts can influence how they reflect on playful learning opportunities.

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.

Explain This, Explore That: A Study of Parent-Child Interaction in a Children's Museum.

Parents visiting a gear exhibit at a children's museum were instructed to encourage their children (N = 65; ages 4-6) to explain, explore, or engage as usual. Instructions led to different patterns of play at the exhibit: Encouragement to explain led to greater discussion of gear mechanisms, whereas encouragement to explore led to more time connecting gears. In the explain condition, parents' questions predicted their children's discussion and further testing of gears. Questions also predicted the amount of time children spent on a follow-up task. Parents' exploration predicted an increase in exploration by their children. These data indicate that minimal interventions impact parent-child interaction at a museum exhibit and that prompts to explore or explain uniquely influence parent and child behavior.

Children's Developing Descriptions and Judgments of Pretending.

Two studies investigated 4- to 7-year-olds' knowledge about pretending. In Study 1, children (N = 66) defined pretending and described examples of own and others' pretending. In Study 2, children (N = 52) defined pretending and then completed a battery of measures that examined their understanding that pretending involved mental states. In Study 1, older children articulated more defining features of pretending than younger children. When describing how they or others pretended, children focused on action or appearance, regardless of whether they had included more defining features in their definitions of pretending. In Study 2, the more defining features children articulated, the better their performance on the battery. We discuss the implications of these data for the role of pretending in children's developing theory of mind.

Preschoolers' Understanding of How Others Learn Through Action and Instruction.

It is widely believed that exploration is a mechanism for young children's learning. The present investigation examines preschoolers' beliefs about how learning occurs. We asked 3- to 5-year-olds to articulate how characters in a set of stories learned about a new toy. Younger preschoolers were more likely to overemphasize the role of characters' actions in learning than older children were (Experiment 1, N = 53). Overall performance improved when the stories explicitly stated that characters were originally ignorant and clarified the characters' actions, but general developmental trends remained (Experiment 2, N = 48). These data suggest that explicit metacognitive understanding of the relation between actions and learning is developing during the preschool years, which might have implications for how children learn from exploration.

Children's developing knowledge of and reflection about teaching.

A sample of 4- to 7-year-olds (N=61) defined "teaching" and described what and how others had taught them as well as what and how they had taught others. Whereas 4- and 5-year-olds were often unable to define teaching, 6- and 7-year-olds most frequently defined teaching by describing processes that could cause knowledge change. Children who held process-based definitions were more likely to offer examples of what others had taught them, to identify who had taught them, and to describe being taught through direct instruction. They were also better able to describe how they had taught others. We consider the results in light of previous interviews in which children were asked to define learning, and we discuss the implications for children's developing understanding of the connections among knowledge, learning, and teaching.

Children's developing understanding of what and how they learn.

What do children know about learning? Children between 4 and 10 years of age were asked what they thought the word learning meant and then engaged in a structured interview about what kinds of things they learned and how they learned those things. Most of the 4- and 5-year-olds' responses to these questions indicated a lack of awareness about the nature of learning or how learning occurs. In contrast, the 8- to 10-year-olds showed a strong understanding of learning as a process and could often generate explicit metacognitive responses indicating that they understood under what circumstances learning would occur. The 6- and 7-year-olds were in a transitional stage between these two levels of understanding. We discuss the implications of this development with children's theory-of-mind development more generally.

Visual field bias in hearing and deaf adults during judgments of facial expression and identity.

The dominance of the right hemisphere during face perception is associated with more accurate judgments of faces presented in the left rather than the right visual field (RVF). Previous research suggests that the left visual field (LVF) bias typically observed during face perception tasks is reduced in deaf adults who use sign language, for whom facial expressions convey important linguistic information. The current study examined whether visual field biases were altered in deaf adults whenever they viewed expressive faces, or only when attention was explicitly directed to expression. Twelve hearing adults and 12 deaf signers were trained to recognize a set of novel faces posing various emotional expressions. They then judged the familiarity or emotion of faces presented in the left or RVF, or both visual fields simultaneously. The same familiar and unfamiliar faces posing neutral and happy expressions were presented in the two tasks. Both groups were most accurate when faces were presented in both visual fields. Across tasks, the hearing group demonstrated a bias toward the LVF. In contrast, the deaf group showed a bias toward the LVF during identity judgments that shifted marginally toward the RVF during emotion judgments. Two secondary conditions tested whether these effects generalized to angry faces and famous faces and similar effects were observed. These results suggest that attention to facial expression, not merely the presence of emotional expression, reduces a typical LVF bias for face processing in deaf signers.

Behavioral and neural evidence of increased attention to the bottom half of the face in deaf signers.

PURPOSE: This study examined the effects of deafness and sign language use on the distribution of attention across the top and bottom halves of faces. METHODS: In a composite face task, congenitally deaf signers and typically hearing controls made same/different judgments of the top or bottom halves of faces presented with the halves aligned or spatially misaligned, while event-related potentials (ERPs) were recorded. RESULTS: Both groups were more accurate when judging misaligned than aligned faces, which indicates holistic face processing. Misalignment affected all ERP components examined, with effects on the N170 resembling those of face inversion. Hearing adults were similarly accurate when judging the top and bottom halves of the faces, but deaf signers were more accurate when attending to the bottom than the top. Attending to the top elicited faster P1 and N170 latencies for both groups; within the deaf group, this effect was greatest for individuals who produced the highest accuracies when attending to the top. CONCLUSIONS: These findings dovetail with previous research by providing behavioral and neural evidence of increased attention to the bottom half of the face in deaf signers, and by documenting that these effects generalize to a speeded task, in the absence of gaze shifts, with neutral facial expressions.

Gaze patterns during identity and emotion judgments in hearing adults and deaf users of American Sign Language.

Deaf individuals rely on facial expressions for emotional, social, and linguistic cues. In order to test the hypothesis that specialized experience with faces can alter typically observed gaze patterns, twelve hearing adults and twelve deaf, early-users of American Sign Language judged the emotion and identity of expressive faces (including whole faces, and isolated top and bottom halves), while accuracy and fixations were recorded. Both groups recognized individuals more accurately from top than bottom halves, and emotional expressions from bottom than top halves. Hearing adults directed the majority of fixations to the top halves of faces in both tasks, but fixated the bottom half slightly more often when judging emotion than identity. In contrast, deaf adults often split fixations evenly between the top and bottom halves regardless of task demands. These results suggest that deaf adults have habitual fixation patterns that may maximize their ability to gather information from expressive faces.

Behavioral and ERP measures of holistic face processing in a composite task.

Holistic processing of faces is characterized by encoding of the face as a single stimulus. This study employed a composite face task to examine whether holistic processing varies when attention is restricted to the top as compared to the bottom half of the face, and whether evidence of holistic processing would be observed in event-related potentials. Analyses of behavioral data showed that spatial misalignment of the face halves disrupted holistic processing and enhanced detection of repeated attended halves. Effects of misalignment on the N170, VPP and N250 ERP components resembled effects of face inversion. Attention to the top half of the face was associated with faster P1, N170, VPP, and P2 latencies than attending to the bottom, suggesting automatic processing of the eye region. Further, N170 latency effects suggested that structural encoding of the face is facilitated during holistic processing. N250 latency effects reflected task difficulty. Finally, an overall right hemispheric asymmetry was most pronounced when holistic face processing was greatest. Results are discussed in light of recent proposals that holistic face processing is a subtype of configural face processing.