↓ Skip to main content

Children’s Learning from Touch Screens: A Dual Representation Perspective

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Psychology, August 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
3 X users

Readers on

mendeley
83 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.
Title
Children’s Learning from Touch Screens: A Dual Representation Perspective
Published in
Frontiers in Psychology, August 2016
DOI 10.3389/fpsyg.2016.01220
Pubmed ID
Authors

Kelly J Sheehan, David H Uttal

Abstract

Parents and educators often expect that children will learn from touch screen devices, such as during joint e-book reading. Therefore an essential question is whether young children understand that the touch screen can be a symbolic medium - that entities represented on the touch screen can refer to entities in the real world. Research on symbolic development suggests that symbolic understanding requires that children develop dual representational abilities, meaning children need to appreciate that a symbol is an object in itself (i.e., picture of a dog) while also being a representation of something else (i.e., the real dog). Drawing on classic research on symbols and new research on children's learning from touch screens, we offer the perspective that children's ability to learn from the touch screen as a symbolic medium depends on the effect of interactivity on children's developing dual representational abilities. Although previous research on dual representation suggests the interactive nature of the touch screen might make it difficult for young children to use as a symbolic medium, the unique interactive affordances may help alleviate this difficulty. More research needs to investigate how the interactivity of the touch screen affects children's ability to connect the symbols on the screen to the real world. Given the interactive nature of the touch screen, researchers and educators should consider both the affordances of the touch screen as well as young children's cognitive abilities when assessing whether young children can learn from it as a symbolic medium.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 83 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Russia 1 1%
Unknown 82 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 15 18%
Student > Master 15 18%
Researcher 9 11%
Student > Bachelor 8 10%
Student > Doctoral Student 4 5%
Other 14 17%
Unknown 18 22%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 28 34%
Social Sciences 13 16%
Nursing and Health Professions 5 6%
Arts and Humanities 3 4%
Computer Science 2 2%
Other 11 13%
Unknown 21 25%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. 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 16 April 2017.
All research outputs
#12,669,223
of 22,882,389 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Psychology
#11,291
of 29,979 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#177,365
of 355,875 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Psychology
#196
of 380 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,882,389 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 44th percentile – i.e., 44% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 29,979 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 12.5. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 61% 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 355,875 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 49th percentile – i.e., 49% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 380 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 46th percentile – i.e., 46% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.