Touch-and-feel features in "first words" picture books hinder infants' word learning.

Little is known about the role of book features in infant word learning from picture books. We conducted a preregistered study to assess the role of touch-and-feel features in infants' ability to learn new words from picture books. A total of 48 infants (Mage = 16.75 months, SD = 1.85) were assigned to a touch-and-feel picture-book condition or a standard picture-book condition (no touch-and-feel features) and were taught a novel label for an unfamiliar animal by the researcher during a book-reading session. Infants were then tested on their ability to recognize the label (i.e., choose the target from a choice of two pictures on hearing it named) and to generalize this knowledge to other types of pictures and real-world objects (scale model animals and stuffed animals). Infants in the no touch-and-feel condition performed above chance when choosing the target picture, whereas infants in the touch-and-feel condition did not. Infants in both conditions failed to generalize this knowledge to other pictures and objects. This study extends our knowledge about the role of tactile features in infant word learning from picture books. Although manipulative features like touch-and-feel patches might be engaging for infants, they may detract from learning. Depending on the purpose of the activity, parents and practitioners might find it useful to consider such book features when selecting books to read with their infants.

Testing mechanisms underlying children's reading development: The power of learning lexical representations.

Prominent theories of reading development have separately emphasized the relevance of children's skill in learning (Share, 2008) and lexical representations (Perfetti & Hart, 2002). Integrating these ideas, we examined whether skill in learning lexical representations is a mechanism that might explain children's reading development. To do so we conducted a longitudinal study, following 139 children from Grades 3 to 5. In Grade 3, children completed measures of word reading and reading comprehension and again at Grade 5. In Grade 4, children read short stories containing novel words; they were later tested on their memory for the spellings and meanings of these new words, capturing orthographic and semantic learning, respectively. Using multiple-mediation path analysis, we tested whether children's skill in learning orthographic and semantic dimensions of new words was a mediator of individual differences in each of word reading and reading comprehension. In models controlling for nonverbal ability, working memory, vocabulary, and phonological awareness, we found two clear effects: individual differences in orthographic learning at Grade 4 mediated the gains that children made in word reading between Grades 3 and 5 and individual differences in semantic learning at Grade 4 mediated gains in reading comprehension over the same time period. These findings suggest that children's ability to learn lexical representations is a mechanism in reading development, with orthographic effects on word reading and semantic effects on reading comprehension. These findings show the power and the specificity of children's capacity to learn in determining their progress in learning to read. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved).

Caregivers' Perceptions of COVID-19 Educational Disruptions on Children With Developmental Language Disorder and Typically Developing Peers.

PURPOSE: Understanding the experiences of families of children with developmental language disorder (DLD) during COVID-19 educational disruptions is essential for designing responsive supports during pandemic recovery efforts and beyond. This qualitative study describes the experiences of families of first- and second-grade children with DLD during the pandemic as compared to the experiences of families of typically developing (TD) peers. METHOD: A conventional content analysis approach was used to analyze caregivers' written responses to open-ended questions regarding their perceptions of COVID-19 educational disruptions. Responses were analyzed separately by group: caregivers of children with DLD (n = 23) and caregivers of TD children (n = 22). RESULTS: Four categories of caregiver responses were generated for each group: impacts on children, remote learning challenges, impacts on caregivers, and protective factors. For both groups, concerns about the child's well-being and literacy learning were most prevalent and prevailed over concerns about oral language. Most caregivers in each group described negative impacts of educational disruptions on their cdhildren. As compared to caregivers of TD children, caregivers of children with DLD reported higher rates of remote learning challenges and more negative impacts on literacy learning, speech and/or language, and education in general. DLD caregivers also shared fewer positive comments and remarks related to protective factors. CONCLUSIONS: Results indicate that families of children with DLD may have experienced more challenges during COVID-19 educational disruptions as compared to families of TD peers. Thus, responsive research and supports for these families is essential.