Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39045442›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in psychology2024

Caregiver and child question types during a museum interaction.

Jill C Thorson, Jill M Trumbell, Kimberly Nesbitt

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in psychology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Jill C ThorsonDepartment of Communication Sciences and Disorders, University of New Hampshire, Durham, NH, United States.
Jill M TrumbellDepartment of Human Development and Family Studies, University of New Hampshire, Durham, NH, United States.
Kimberly NesbittDepartment of Human Development and Family Studies, University of New Hampshire, Durham, NH, United States.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Children museums provide an engaging learning environment for families with exhibits designed to stimulate caregiver-child interactions. Specific types of questions have been shown to support child language learning by scaffolding more elaborative responses. This study analyzed the use of question form types during caregiver-child interactions in a children's museum, aiming to discern their correlation with child language proficiency. We examined and transcribed two exhibit explorations by 43 caregiver-child dyads (3- to 6-year-old children). Our analysis encompasses various syntactic question types (e.g., yes-no, wh-) and measures of child language proficiency, including lexical diversity, morphosyntactic complexity, and overall language ability. Findings reveal disparities in question form usage among caregivers and children, with caregivers predominantly employing closed questions and children balancing closed and open-ended types. Children of caregivers who predominantly posed closed questions exhibited shorter utterances and lower overall language scores. Details on other question forms are presented (sub-types of polar, wh-, alternative, and echo). These findings contribute to our understanding of how question form influences language development and caregiver-child interactions.

Indexed as

caregiver–child interactionschild languagechildren’s museumlanguage developmentquestion forms

Identifiers

PMID39045442
PMCPMC11263923

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.