Content Not Form Predicts Oral Language Comprehension: The Influence of the Medium on Preschoolers' Story Understanding

• In Event: 66.017 - Content Features in Digitized Stories That Promote Young Children's Vocabulary and Story Comprehension

Abstract

Since the mid-1990, digital storybooks have becoming increasingly popular in the preschool book market (Rideout, 2013). Sales in children’s electronic books have risen exponentially from 7 million dollars in 2011 to 19.3 million in 2012 (Publishers Weekly, 2012).
Although digital books appear to be a transparent source of information, there has been increasing concern regarding children’s ability to comprehend stories in this form. Anderson and Pempek (2005), for example, have coined the term ‘video deficit,’ to account for the differential between learning from real-life events and learning from video. Studies report that while young children can imitate what they see on video, word learning and comprehension is limited indicating video deficits that may persist beyond 36-months of age.
This study examines children’s word learning and comprehension from stories read-aloud (by a teacher) and in digital form. It raises the following questions: 1) Are there differences in children’s vocabulary and comprehension by medium? 2) Are there differences in children’s interest in stories by medium?
Method. Using a within-subject design, we engaged 36 preschool children ages 3-4 years in listening to four storybooks, two of which were in digital form, two in traditional storybook read-alouds (carefully adapted to be equivalent). Children were randomly assigned two of the stories on a digital platform, and two were read aloud. Consequently each child heard all four stories, though in different media. Following the reading, children completed vocabulary and comprehension tasks (retelling the story; sequencing the story) and a brief motivational checklist.
Results: We found no significant differences across medium: Children comprehended equally well regardless of whether the story was read aloud or in digital form (t(35) = .22, p = .827; t(35) = .04, p = .971 for vocabulary). Similarly, there were no differences in motivation to read and learn across medium. There were, however, differences in comprehension across stories: Using a repeated measures ANOVA, we found a significant main effect of story for free recall F(3, 33) = 8.19, p <.001, story sequencing, F(3, 33) = 4.91, p = .006, and vocabulary, F(3, 33) = 9.09, p <.001. Taken together, this research indicates that it is the content of the book rather than its form that influenced story comprehension, and that the video deficit, while present with very young children may no longer be a stumbling block to comprehension for children in the preschool years.
Significance: Regardless of the medium of presentation, children appeared to have more limited understanding of certain stories than others. This suggests that neither medium was able to bolster children’s comprehension when the story was perceived to be difficult or not motivating. At the same time, however, it suggests that neither medium was superior to the other.These results could further buttress Clark’s thesis (1983), suggesting that we have overestimated the means of delivery and have underestimated the importance of the content conveyed in the media. Content matters for children’s comprehension development.

Authors

• Susan B. Neuman, New York University

• Kevin M. Wong, New York University