↓ Skip to main content

Forces and Motion: How Young Children Understand Causal Events

Overview of attention for article published in Child Development, July 2013
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Readers on

mendeley
77 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Article details
Title
Forces and Motion: How Young Children Understand Causal Events
Published in
Child Development, July 2013
DOI 10.1111/cdev.12035
Pubmed ID
Authors
Abstract

How do children evaluate complex causal events? This study investigates preschoolers' representation of force dynamics in causal scenes, asking whether (a) children understand how single and dual forces impact an object's movement and (b) this understanding varies across cause types (Cause, Enable, Prevent). Three-and-a half- to 5.5-year-olds (n = 60) played a board game in which they were asked to predict the endpoint of a ball being acted upon by one or two forces. Children mostly understood the interactions of forces underlying each type of cause; only 5.5-year-olds could integrate two contradictory forces. Children perceive force interactions underlying causal events, but some concepts might not be fully understood until later in childhood. This study provides a new way of thinking about causal relations.

Login to access the Attention Digest and the Sentiment Analysis related to this output.

Timeline Attention over time Attention Score history
Login to access the full charts related to this output.
Activity
Login to access the full charts related to this output.
X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley demographics

Mendeley demographics

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 77 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Login to view Mendeley reader trends over time.

Geographical breakdown

Geographical breakdown
Country Count As %
United States 5 6%
Spain 3 4%
Germany 1 1%
Unknown 68 88%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status
Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 18 23%
Researcher 12 16%
Student > Bachelor 8 10%
Student > Doctoral Student 7 9%
Student > Master 7 9%
Other 8 10%
Unknown 17 22%
Readers by discipline
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 29 38%
Social Sciences 10 13%
Linguistics 3 4%
Medicine and Dentistry 3 4%
Neuroscience 2 3%
Other 10 13%
Unknown 20 26%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 January 2013.
All research outputs
#20,952,893
of 30,038,132 outputs
Outputs from Child Development
#4,283
of 4,782 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#144,883
of 216,301 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Child Development
#18
of 20 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 30,038,132 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 20th percentile – i.e., 20% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,782 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 28.3. This one is in the 6th percentile – i.e., 6% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
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 216,301 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 24th percentile – i.e., 24% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 20 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 10th percentile – i.e., 10% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.