Responsive interactions key to toddlers' ability to learn language

Young children readily learn words from their parents, grandparents, and child care providers in live conversations, but learning from video has proven more difficult. A new study questioned why and found that it's the responsiveness of the interactions that's key: When we respond to children in timely and meaningful ways, they learn—even when that response comes from a screen.

The study, by researchers at the University of Washington, Temple University, and the University of Delaware, appears in the journal Child Development.

Three dozen 2-year-olds were randomly assigned to learn new in one of three ways: training with a live person, training through video chat technology such as Skype that allows audio and video interaction via screen between users at different locations, and watching a prerecorded video of the same person instructing a different child who was off screen and thus out of synch with the child in the study.

In the study, children learned new words only when conversing with a person and in the live video chat, both of which involved responsive, back-and-forth social interactions. They didn't learn the new words through the prerecorded video instruction, which was not responsive to the child.

Children who learned in the two environments that involved real-time even used the new words to label the actions when different people performed them.

"The study highlights the importance of responsive interactions for language learning," suggests Kathy Hirsh-Pasek, professor of psychology at Temple University, who coauthored the study. "Interactions allow adults and toddlers to respond to each other in a back-and-forth fashion—such as live instruction and the . These types of interactions seem to be central for learning words."

"The research has important implications for ," Hirsh-Pasek continues. "Children are less likely to learn from videos than from live, back-and-forth responsive interactions with caring adults. Young children are not good at learning language if they're merely parked in front of screen media."

add to favorites email to friend print save as pdf

Related Stories

Study shows humans and apes learn language differently

Apr 02, 2013

(Medical Xpress)—How do children learn language? Many linguists believe that the stages that a child goes through when learning language mirror the stages of language development in primate evolution. ...

Recommended for you

New book examines the known and unknown about OCD

19 hours ago

A new and thorough overview of a disturbing behavioural condition that will affect 2.3 per cent of the UK population in their lifetime has been written by University of Sussex researchers.

Ibuprofen relieves women's hurt feelings, not men's

21 hours ago

(Medical Xpress)—For years, researchers have known that physical pain relievers such as ibuprofen can also help ease emotional pain, but new research suggests that ibuprofen has contrasting effects on men ...

User comments

Adjust slider to filter visible comments by rank

Display comments: newest first

Andrew Weiler
not rated yet Sep 24, 2013
This study is interesting but flawed. Children learn their mother tongue in every situation, without being consciously taught anything. There are of course the helpful parents and grandparents, but at best we are only talking about minimal haphazard intervention by them. In some societies families do not intervene but let the child develop through watching and playing with their friends...they still learn the mother tongue!

Learning happens when there is engagement. IF the children are engaged, they will learn. That is the same for adults as well. If the video input encouraged active engagement, then that may work...but there are not many of them. For adults I have seen experiments where they learn just as well from a video cast as the people who were in the room.

This article describes just what engineered engagement looks like for adults - http://www.strate...ivation/
MikkelH
not rated yet Nov 15, 2013
Andrew, I do not see where your comments differ from anything stated by the article, except that you add that adult learners are capable of learning "just as well" from non-interactive video. Could you be more specific about the perceived flaw?