skip to main content
10.1145/3078072.3079717acmconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagesidcConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article

Investigating the Effects of Interactive Features for Preschool Television Programming

Published:27 June 2017Publication History

ABSTRACT

As children begin to watch more television programming on systems that allow for interaction, such as tablets and videogame systems, there are different opportunities to engage them. For example, the traditional pseudo-interactive features that cue young children's participation in television viewing (e.g., asking a question and pausing for two seconds to allow for an answer) can be restructured to include correct response timing by the program or eventually even feedback. We performed three studies to examine the effects of accurate program response times, repeating unanswered questions, and providing feedback on the children's likelihood of response. We find that three- to five-year-old children are more likely to verbally engage with programs that wait for their response and repeat unanswered questions. However, providing feedback did not affect response rates for children in this age range.

References

  1. Hennie Brugman and Albert Russel. 2004. Annotating Multi-media/Multi-modal Resources with ELAN. In LREC, Fourth International Conference on Language Resources and Evaluation.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  2. Sandra L Calvert, Bonnie L Strong, Eliza L Jacobs, and Emily E Conger. 2007. Interaction and participation for young Hispanic and Caucasian girls' and boys' learning of media content. Media Psychology 9, 2 (2007), 431--445.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  3. Alisha M Crawley, Daniel R Anderson, Alice Wilder, Marsha Williams, and Angela Santomero. 1999. Effects of repeated exposures to a single episode of the television program "Blue's Clues" on the viewing behaviors and comprehension of preschool children. Journal of Educational Psychology 91, 4 (1999), 630.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  4. Sylvia MJ Hains and Darwin W Muir. 1996. Effects of stimulus contingency in infant-adult interactions. Infant Behavior and Development 19, 1 (1996), 49--61.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  5. Dade Hayes. 2008. Anytime Playdate: Inside the Preschool Entertainment Boom, or, How Television Became My Baby's Best Friend. Simon and Schuster.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  6. Alice Ann Howard Gola, Melissa N Richards, Alexis R Lauricella, and Sandra L Calvert. 2013. Building meaningful parasocial relationships between toddlers and media characters to teach early mathematical skills. Media Psychology 16, 4 (2013), 390--411.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  7. Marina Krcmar. 2010. Can social meaningfulness and repeat exposure help infants and toddlers overcome the video deficit? Media Psychology 13, 1 (2010), 31--53.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  8. Alexis R Lauricella, Alice Ann Howard Gola, and Sandra L Calvert. 2011. Toddlers' learning from socially meaningful video characters. Media Psychology 14, 2 (2011), 216--232.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  9. Deborah L Linebarger and Dale Walker. 2005. Infants' and toddlers' television viewing and language outcomes. American Behavioral Scientist 48, 5 (2005), 624--645.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  10. Michael Cohen Group and USDOE. 2011. Young Children, Apps and iPad. Michael Cohen Group.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  11. Lauren J Myers, Rachel B LeWitt, Renee E Gallo, and Nicole M Maselli. 2016. Baby FaceTime: Can toddlers learn from online video chat? Developmental Science (2016).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  12. Mark Nielsen, Gabrielle Simcock, and Linda Jenkins. 2008. The effect of social engagement on 24-month-olds' imitation from live and televised models. Developmental Science 11, 5 (2008), 722--731.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  13. Jessica Taylor Piotrowski. 2014. Participatory cues and program familiarity predict young children's learning from educational television. Media Psychology (2014), 311--331.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  14. Sarah Roseberry, Kathy Hirsh-Pasek, and Roberta M Golinkoff. 2014. Skype me! Socially contingent interactions help toddlers learn language. Child Development 85, 3 (2014), 956--970.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  15. Jennifer Tam, Elizbeth Carter, Sara Kiesler, and Jessica Hodgins. 2012. Video increases the perception of naturalness during remote interactions with latency. In CHI'12 Extended Abstracts on Human Factors in Computing Systems. ACM, 2045--2050. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  16. Ron Tamborini and Dolf Zillmann. 1985. Effects of questions, personalized communication style, and pauses for reflection in children's educational programs. The Journal of Educational Research 79, 1 (1985), 19--26.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  17. Georgene L Troseth, Megan M Saylor, and Allison H Archer. 2006. Young children's use of video as a source of socially relevant information. Child Development 77, 3 (2006), 786--799.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref

Index Terms

  1. Investigating the Effects of Interactive Features for Preschool Television Programming

    Recommendations

    Comments

    Login options

    Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

    Sign in
    • Published in

      cover image ACM Conferences
      IDC '17: Proceedings of the 2017 Conference on Interaction Design and Children
      June 2017
      808 pages
      ISBN:9781450349215
      DOI:10.1145/3078072

      Copyright © 2017 ACM

      Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than the author(s) must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected].

      Publisher

      Association for Computing Machinery

      New York, NY, United States

      Publication History

      • Published: 27 June 2017

      Permissions

      Request permissions about this article.

      Request Permissions

      Check for updates

      Qualifiers

      • research-article

      Acceptance Rates

      IDC '17 Paper Acceptance Rate25of118submissions,21%Overall Acceptance Rate172of578submissions,30%

      Upcoming Conference

      IDC '24
      Interaction Design and Children
      June 17 - 20, 2024
      Delft , Netherlands

    PDF Format

    View or Download as a PDF file.

    PDF

    eReader

    View online with eReader.

    eReader