How Do Children Perception and Process Educational Television Programs
Subject Areas : Educationalvahid biktashi 1 , Faezeh Taghipour 2 * , Mehrdad Sadeghi 3
1 - Ph.D. Student of Media Management, Department of Management, Faculty of Islamic Governance, Islamic Azad University Isfahan (Khorasgan) Branch, Isfahan, Iran
2 - Associate Professor, Department of Communication Sciences and Business Management, Faculty of Humanities and Law, Islamic Azad University Isfahan (Khorasgan) Branch, Isfahan, Iran
3 - Department of Management , Isf.C , Islamic Azad University, Isfahan, Iran.
Keywords: Film Comprehension, Tv Programs, Visual Narrative Comprehension, Child,
Abstract :
The aim of this study was to identify the factors affecting the way children Perception and process educational television programs. This research is a qualitative method and has been carried out using a meta-synthesis qualitative design. In meta - synthesis; Five databases, including PsychInfo, Psychology and Behavioral Sciences Collection, Scopus, Science Direct and Web of Science, were examined based on the six-step method of Sandlowski and Barroso, and 49 related research sources were used as the basis for analysis. The results showed that the factors affecting children's understanding and processing of television educational programs can be classified into three main themes of stimuli, primary processing and secondary processing. Given the limited cognitive resources children have available at a given time to process media, this theory contends that children " s understanding of the narrative (storyline) and educational components of the content will benefit when the educational content is tightly woven within the narrative. Cognitive research of this type by ensuring the alignment of the information flow with the way the brain processes information can help designers to optimize the sequential processing of the information hidden in the child's programs in order to advance their design goals.
Healy, J. M. (1990). Endangered minds: Why our children don’t think. New York: Simon & Schuster.
Postman, N. (1985). Amusing ourselves to death. New York: Penguin.
Winn, M. (1977). The Plug-in drug. New York: Penguin.
Weber, R., Ritterfield, U., & Kostygina, A. (2006). Aggression and violence as effects of playing violent video games? In Vorderer, P., & Bryant, J. (Eds.), Playing video games: Motives, responses, and consequences (pp. 347–362). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
Wilson, B. J., Kunkel, D., Linz, D., Potter, J., Donnerstein, E., Smith, S. L., Blumenthal, E., & Gray, T. (1997). National television violence study (Vol. 1). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
John, D. R. (1999). Consumer socialization of children: A retrospective look at 25 years of research. Journal of Consumer Research, 26, 183–213.
Kunkel, D. (2001). Children and television advertising. In D. G. Singer & J. L. Singer (Eds.), Handbook of children and the media (pp. 375–393). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
S.J. Marshall, T. Gorely, S.J.H. Biddle. A descriptive epidemiology of screen-based media use in youth: A review and critique
M. Adelantado-Renau, D. Moliner-Urdiales, I. Cavero-Redondo, M.R. Beltran-Valls, V. Martínez-Vizcaíno, C. Álvarez-Bueno. Association between screen media use and academic performance among children and adolescents: A systematic review and meta-analysis
C. Li, G. Cheng, T. Sha, W. Cheng, Y. Yan. The relationships between screen use and health indicators among infants, toddlers, and preschoolers: A meta-analysis and systematic review
Mayer, R. E. (2001). Multimedia learning (pp. 31–48). New York: Cambridge University Press.
Mayer, R. E. (2003). Learning and instruction. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Merrill Prentice Hall.
Moreno, R. (2006). Learning in high-tech and multimedia environments. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 15, 63–67
Armstrong, G. B., & Greenberg, B. S. (1990). Background television as an inhibitor of cognitive processing. Human Communication Research, 16, 355–386.
Beentjes, J. W. J., & van der Voort, T. H. A. (1993). Television viewing versus reading: Mental effort, retention, and inferential learning. Communication Education, 42, 191–205.
Lorch, E. P., & Castle, V. J. (1997). Preschool children’s attention to television: Visual attention and probe response times. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 66, 111–127.
Fisch, S. M. (2000). A capacity model of children’s comprehension of educational content on television. Media Psychology, 2(1), 63–91.
Fisch, S. M. (2004). Children’s learning from educational television: Sesame Street and beyond. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
Alade, F., & Nathanson, A. (2016). What preschoolers bring to the show: The relation between viewer characteristics and children’s learning from educational television. Media Psychology, 19, 406–430. doi:10.1080/15213269.2015.1054945
Piotrowski, J. T. (2014). Participatory cues and program familiarity predict young children’s learning from educational television. Media Psychology, 17, 311–331. doi:10.1080/15213269.2014.932288
Magliano, J. P., Higgs, K., & Clinton, J. A. (2019). Sources of complexity in comprehension across modalities of narrative experience. In M. Grishakova & M. Poulaki (Eds.), Narrative complexity and media: Experiential and cognitive interfaces (pp. 149–173). Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press.
Magliano, J. P., Loschky, L. C., Clinton, J. A., & Larson, A. M. (2013). Is reading the same as viewing? an exploration of the similarities and differences between processing text- and visually based narratives. In B. Miller, L. Cutting, & P. McCardle (Eds.), Unraveling the behavioral, neurobiological, and genetic components of reading comprehension (pp. 78–90). Baltimore, MD: Brookes.
Wackman, D. B., & Wartella, E. (1977). A review of cognitive development theory and research and the implication for research on children’s responses to television. Communication Research, 4, 203–204. doi:10.1177/009365027700400205
Flavell, J. H., Flavell, E. R., Green, F. L., & Korfmacher, J. E. (1990). Do young children think of television images as pictures or real objects? Journal of Broadcasting and Electronic Media, 34, 399–419. doi:10.1080/08838159009386752
Wright, J., Huston, A. C., Reitz, A. L., & Suwatchara, P. (1994). Young children’s perceptions of television reality: Determinants and developmental differences. Developmental Psychology, 30, 229–239. doi:10.1037/0012-1649.30.2.229
Fenstermacher, S., & Saudino, K. J. (2006). Understanding individual differences in young children’s imitative behavior. Developmental Review, 26, 346–364. doi:10.1016/j.dr.2006.05.001
Lapierre, M. (2015). Development and persuasion understanding: Predicting knowledge of persuasion/selling intent from children’s theory of mind. Journal of Communication, 65, 423–442. doi:10.1111/jcom.12155
Mar, R. A., Tackett, J. L., & Moore, C. (2010). Exposure to media and theory-of-mind development in preschoolers. Cognitive Development, 25, 69–78. doi: 10.1016/j.cogdev.2009.11.002
Grace, D. J., & Henward, A. S. (2013). Investigating young children’s talk about the media. Contemporary Issues in Early Childhood, 14, 138–154. doi:10.2304/ciec.2013.14.2.138
Collins, W. A., Wellman, H., Keniston, A. H., & Westby, S. D. (1978). Age-related aspects of comprehension and inference from a televised dramatic narrative. Child Development, 49, 389–399. doi:10.2307/1128703
Luke, C. (1985). Television discourse processing: A schema theoretic approach. Communication Education, 34, 91–105. doi:10.1080/03634528509378591
Narvaez, D., Bentley, J., Gleason, T., & Samuels, J. (1998). Moral theme comprehension in third graders, fifth graders, and college students. Reading Psychology, 19, 217–241. doi:10.1080/ 0270271980190203
Mares, M.-L., & Acosta, E. E. (2008). Be kind to three-legged dogs: Children’s literal interpretations of TV’s moral lessons. Media Psychology, 11, 377–399. doi:10.1080/15213260802204355
Nye, E., Melendez‐Torres, G. J., & Bonell, C. (2016). Origins, methods and advances in qualitative meta‐synthesis. Review of Education, 4(1), 57-79.
Zimmer, L. (2006). Qualitative meta‐synthesis: a question of dialoguing with texts. Journal of advanced nursing, 53(3), 311-318.
MacRae, H. M., Regehr, G., Brenneman, F., McKenzie, M., & McLeod, R. S. (2004). Assessment of critical appraisal skills. The American journal of surgery, 187(1), 120-123.
Cooper,H. Hedges,L.v. (2009). Research synthsis as a scientific process. A chapter on: the Handbook of Reserch synthesis and Meta-Analysis (2 ed). Ruaaell sage
Sandelowski, M., & Barroso. J. (2007). Handbook for synthesizing qualitative research, New York, NY: Springer, 1-311.