ArticleReading and writing2022
Body-object interaction effect in word recognition and its relationship with screen time in Chinese children.
Article in Reading and writing, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
- The role of body-object interaction in children's concept processing: insights from two Chinese communities.Cognitive processing · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
A sample of 144 s- and 150 fourth-grade Chinese children was recruited to investigate the influence of body-object interactions (BOIs) on word recognition, i.e., how easily they could interact physically with each word's referent. The moderation on this relationship of children's screen time for entertainment purposes (i.e., the viewing or use of any device with a screen) was also examined. In a lexical decision task, the children were asked to judge whether each item was a real Chinese word. Each real word was assigned a BOI rating score. Model analysis showed that the BOI rating was a significant predictor of the children's word recognition performances. The children recognized the words with higher BOI ratings at higher accuracy rates and higher response speeds more than the words with lower BOI ratings, showing a BOI effect. These results suggest an involvement of sensorimotor information in processing concepts. As well, the results showed a moderating effect of screen time on the BOI effect. With the increase of screen time, the BOI effect was reduced in terms of response speed. Moreover, the influence of the screen time on the BOI effect was larger in the second graders than in the fourth graders.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.