Please enable JavaScript.
Coggle requires JavaScript to display documents.
Do children show a preference for live animals over toys?
c4ba3f96-e6cf…
Do children show a preference for live animals over toys?
LoBue, V., Bloom Pickard, M., & Sherman, K. (2013). Young Children’s Interest in Live Animals. British Journal of Developmental Psychology, 31(1), 57–69. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.2044-835X.2012.02078.
Experiment 1
-
-
Test Statistic
F(1, 72) = 12.7, p < .01: Odds of interaction difference by chance <1%.
Degrees of Freedom = 72: 73 data points, 2 groups (73-1).
F(1, 861) = 1.5, ns: Time spent difference likely by chance.
χ^2 = 259.2, p < .01, R^2 = .26: <1% chance higher gestures towards animals random; 26% variance explained.
χ^2 = 27.1, p < .01, R^2 = .03: <1% chance mentions/questions difference random; 3% variance explained.
F(1, 843) = 11.7, p < .01: <1% chance questions difference by chance; effect size not given.
-
Conclusion: Children prefer animals over toys, shown by more interactions and communicative actions.
Experiment 2
Research Methods:
Observational study with mixed-effects ANOVAs and logistic regressions.
- 17 females, 21 males (18-36 months) + their parents.
- Used threat-relevant animals (spider and snake) and non-threat-relevant animals (fish and hamster).
- 4 toys and 4 live animals.
- coded the same way as Exp. 1, plus parents interactions were also coded.
H0: There is no difference in responses to threat-relevant and non-threat-relevant animals.
H1: Responses differ based on the threat-relevance of animals.
Dependent Variable: Behaviors of children and parents, interaction time.
Independent Variable : Presence of threat-relevant and non-threat-relevant animals and toys.
Test Statistic:
Number of interactions:
F(1, 152) = 60.2, p < .01: Odds of interaction difference by chance <1%.
Degrees of Freedom = 152: 153 data points, 2 groups (153-1).
Total time of interactions:
F(1, 1,905) = 3.9, p < .05: Time spent difference likely by chance.
Nature of interactions:
- Gestures towards animals: χ^2 = 148.2, p < .01, R^2 = .11: <1% chance higher gestures towards animals random; 11% variance explained.
- Mentions/questions difference: χ^2 = 4.1, p = .05: <1% chance mentions/questions difference random.
- Questions difference: F(1, 1,904) = 67.2, p < .01: <1% chance questions difference by chance; effect size not given.
Conclusion:
- Children and parents interacted more with animals than toys.
- Parents directed children's attention more towards animals, spending more time and engaging in communicative actions.
- Both children and adults demonstrated cautious behavior towards threat-relevant animals.
- Experiment 2 replicates Experiment 1's findings, confirming children's preference for animals over toys.
Limitations
-
Imbalance in Toys vs. Animals: May bias interaction comparison, affecting study robustness.
-
Experiment 3
Research Methods:
Controlled observational study with turn-by-turn displays.
- 10 females, 10 males (18-33 months) + their parents
- presented with 3 displays pairing a live animal with its toy version.
- included parents to assess whether kids interact more with the stimuli with their parents or when alone.
H0: There is no difference in interaction time between real animals and toy animals.
H1: Children spend more time interacting with real animals.
-
Independent Variable: Presence of parents and stimuli type (real animals vs. toy animals).
Test Statistic
Total time of interactions:
F(1, 236) = 82.8, p < .01: Odds of interaction difference by chance <1%.
Degrees of Freedom = 236: 237 data points, 2 groups (237-1).
Parent presence: F(1, 236) = 24.0, p < .01: Interaction difference likely by chance.
Stimulus by parent interaction: F(1, 236) = 11.8, p < .01: Interaction difference likely by chance.
Conclusion:
- Children spend more time interacting with animals than toys, even in a controlled setting.
- Parent presence enhances children's interactions with both animals and toys.
- Children spend significantly more time with real animals when the parent participates.
- Experiment 3 confirms children's preference for animals over toys observed in previous experiments.
Limitations
-
Lack of Interactions without Parents: May bias comparison, affecting study robustness.
-
Preet (100171705)
April 8, 2024