Across many academic disciplines visualisation and notation systems are used for modelling data and developing theory, but in child development visual models are not widely used; yet researchers and students of developmental difficulties may benefit from a visualisation and notation system which can clearly map developmental outcomes and trajectories, and convey hypothesised dynamic causal pathways. Such a system may help understanding of existing accounts and be a tool for developing new theories. We first present criteria that need to be met in order to provide fully nuanced visualisations of development, and discuss strengths and weaknesses of the visualisation system proposed by Morton. Secondly, we present a tool we have designed to give more precise accounts of development while also being accessible, intuitive and visually appealing. We have called this an Accessible Cause-Outcome Representation and Notation System (ACORNS). This system provides a framework for clear mapping and modelling of developmental sequences, illustrating more precisely how functions change over time, how factors interact with the environment, and the absolute and relative nature of causal outcomes. We provide a new template, a set of rules for the appropriate use of boxes and arrows, and a set of visually accessible indicators that can be used to show more precisely relative rates, degrees and variance of functioning over different capacities at different time points. We have designed ACORNS to give a precise and clear visualisation of how development unfolds; allowing the representation of less 'static' and more transactional models of developmental difficulties. We hope ACORNS will help students, clinicians and theoreticians across disciplines to better represent nuances of debates, and be a seed for the development of new theory.
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 14 September 2016.
All research outputs
#7,766,706
of 26,571,932 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Intellectual Disability Research
#540
of 1,560 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#42,243
of 144,489 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Intellectual Disability Research
#4
of 15 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 26,571,932 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 69th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,560 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.5. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 64% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 144,489 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 68% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 15 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 60% of its contemporaries.
