Computers in Human Behavior 62 (2016) 433e441

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Computers in Human Behavior

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/comphumbeh

Full length article

Measuring with Murray: Touchscreen technology and preschoolers'

STEM learning*
*, Alexis R. Lauricella, Leanne Beaudoin-Ryan, Ellen Wartella
Fashina Alade
Center on Media and Human Development, School of Communication, Northwestern University, United States

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t

Article history: American students rank well below international peers in the disciplines of science, technology, engi-
Received 21 February 2016 neering, and mathematics (STEM). Early exposure to STEM-related concepts is critical to later academic
Accepted 27 March 2016 achievement. Given the rise of tablet-computer use in early childhood education settings, interactive
Available online 16 April 2016
technology might be one particularly fruitful way of supplementing early STEM education. Using a
between-subjects experimental design, we sought to determine whether preschoolers could learn a
Keywords:
fundamental math concept (i.e., measurement with non-standard units) from educational technology,
Interactivity
and whether interactivity is a crucial component of learning from that technology. Participants who
Touchscreens
STEM education
either played an interactive tablet-based game or viewed a non-interactive video demonstrated greater
Informal learning transfer of knowledge than those assigned to a control condition. Interestingly, interactivity contributed
Preschoolers to better performance on near transfer tasks, while participants in the non-interactive condition per-
formed better on far transfer tasks. Our findings suggest that, while preschool-aged children can learn
early STEM skills from educational technology, interactivity may only further support learning in certain
contexts.
© 2016 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction an additional four spots. In addition to poorer performance on math

and science assessments, American students have shown less in-
The domains of science, technology, engineering, and mathe- terest in STEM learning compared to their international peers
matics, known collectively as STEM, have been deemed essential to (President's Council of Advisors on Science and Technology, 2009).
preparing American children for the U.S. workforce. For example, In light of these findings, educators and policymakers have turned
the U.S. Department of Education has predicted significant in- their focus to increasing STEM engagement and learning across
creases in the need for STEM-related jobs through 2020 (National grade levels, especially in early childhood education, where these
Center on Education and the Economy, 2008; US Department of domains have been historically underrepresented (Ginsburg &
Education, 2010). Comprehensive and innovative educational ini- Golbeck, 2004).
tiatives within the STEM disciplines are essential in order for Although much of the focus on STEM learning has occurred in
America to remain competitive in an increasingly global market. the K-12 sector (Parette, Quesenberry, & Blum, 2010), some studies
Yet, in recent years, children in the United States have continued have shown that preschool-aged children are not only naturally
to fall behind their international peers in both math and science. In inclined to explore STEM concepts that are embedded in everyday
2009, the Programme for International Student Assessment (PISA) life (e.g., finding patterns, building structures, and asking how and
found that the U.S. ranked 20th of 67 countries in science, well why questions), but also have the cognitive capacity to link these
below the international average. In 2012, the U.S. ranking dropped real world experiences to the underlying scientific concepts, pro-
vided that they have appropriate scaffolding from adults (Bonawitz,
van Schijndel, Friel, & Schulz, 2012; Brenneman, 2011; Callanan &
* Oakes, 1992; Carey, 1985).
This research was supported by a grant from the National Science Foundation
Reese Program, DRL-1252121. In recent years, many new technologies have been developed to
* Corresponding author. Northwestern University, School of Communication, encourage early engagement with STEM-related concepts and
2240 Campus Drive, Frances Searle Building 2-147, Evanston, IL, 60208, United ideas. A search for “science” or “math” in Apple's Kids App Store
States. garners dozens of results. Further, the recent boom in access to
).
E-mail address: [email protected] (F. Alade

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2016.03.080
0747-5632/© 2016 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
434 F. Alade et al. / Computers in Human Behavior 62 (2016) 433e441

mobile technology across socioeconomic lines (Rideout, 2013) has tablets and other touchscreen devices, may offer learning oppor-
led many people to believe that these apps may be a particularly tunities above and beyond what more traditional platforms, like
promising way to deliver educational content to young children, television, can provide. Indeed, virtually all American households
that is, if they are well designed and age appropriate (see, for with children now have some sort of touchscreen device, and
example Hirsh-Pasek et al., 2015). Despite the educational potential parents report being more likely to turn to interactive media as an
of these technologies, very little empirical work has focused on educational tool for their young children than to traditional tele-
determining the degree to which these types of apps are effective in vision (Wartella, Rideout, Lauricella, & Connell, 2014). In light of the
supporting learning. The present experimental study looks at prevalence of today's interactive technologies, the American
whether educational technology is, in fact, a potent way to facilitate Academy of Pediatrics has relaxed their guidelines advising against
early STEM learning among preschool-aged children and whether screen time for young children (Brown, Shifrin, & Hill, 2015). Pre-
interactivity is a critical component of these technologies. vious guidelines suggested prohibiting screen time for children
under 2 and limiting it to 2 h or less for children over 2 (American
2. Literature review Academy of Pediatrics, 2013). Under the current AAP policy, it is
acknowledged that children are growing up “in a world where
2.1. Using technology to support learning ‘screen time’ is becoming simply ‘time’,” and parents are encour-
aged to use media jointly with their children, model responsible
Within the last several decades, a wide array of media tech- media use, and set limits based on the child's individual needs
nologies has become accessible to young children (Rideout, 2013). (Brown et al., 2015).
Media that have been deemed educational are among the most Despite the growing consensus that new interactive technolo-
popular choices for families with children age zero to eight gies offer inherently different opportunities for children than more
(Rideout, 2014). Fisch (2004) explains that educational media are traditional platforms, we do not have a thorough understanding of
intended to supplement formal education by exposing children to just how these experiences differ. While children and media
topics that they might not otherwise encounter and provide scholars have begun to investigate the differential effects of inter-
compelling experiences that encourage children to spend addi- active platforms such as computers and touchscreens versus
tional time exploring concepts that they are learning about in traditional video platforms on child learning, the body of research is
school. In fact, research has shown that children benefit when small and findings are mixed (Lauricella, Pempek, Barr, & Calvert,
developmentally appropriate content is coupled with entertaining 2010; Zack, Barr, Gerhardstein, Dickerson, & Meltzoff, 2009; Zack,
narratives (Anderson, Huston, Schmitt, Linebarger, & Wright, 2001; Gerhardstein, Meltzoff, & Barr, 2013).
Dingwall & Aldridge, 2006; Fisch & McCann, 1993; Linebarger, Much of the research targeted toward learning from interactive
Kosanic, Greenwood, & Doku, 2004; Mares & Woodard, 2005). media has focused on literacy outcomes, like story comprehension,
Prior work on the role of educational media in early learning has by comparing e-books to traditional print books (Jones & Brown,
focused on a wide variety of topics, like early literacy (Jennings, 2011; Krcmar & Cingel, 2014; Lauricella, Barr, & Calvert, 2014).
Hooker, & Linebarger, 2009; Linebarger et al., 2004), prosocial When considered together, the findings are inconclusive. For
skill acquisition (Mares & Woodard, 2005), and adoption of healthy example, Krcmar and Cingel (2014) found that, in a joint parent-
behaviors (Borzekowski & Macha, 2010). Few studies have exam- child reading situation, preschool-aged children showed signifi-
ined the role that mediated experiences play in early STEM cantly greater story comprehension from a traditional storybook
learning, however. One exception is the body of research on compared to an e-book. However, in a similar study, Lauricella et al.
Cyberchase, an animated television show for children ages 8e11, (2014) found no difference in story comprehension between a
funded by the US Department of Education's Ready to Learn traditional storybook and an interactive computer storybook.
initiative. Cyberchase was designed to foster positive attitudes to- Across these and similar studies, there has not been any clear
wards math and to teach mathematical reasoning and problem pattern of evidence demonstrating enhanced literacy learning from
solving. Results from one summative study demonstrated that, digital technology compared to traditional platforms.
compared to non-viewers, children who watched the show once a Beyond the small body of research on literacy learning from
day over a four-week period showed a significant increase in the digital media, even less has been done in other areas of education.
quantity and quality of problem solving heuristics in the areas of In contrast to literacy, there is reason to believe that STEM concepts
nonstandard measurement and irregular shapes (Fisch, 2003). might lend themselves more easily to newer media technology
However, the work on Cyberchase looked mostly at television as the platforms. Science and math skills are typically taught in more
primary learning platform, and the population of interest was older interactive ways than literacy by utilizing, for example, experiential
children. There remains a dearth of empirical research on STEM methods (Carver, 1996). Thus, the affordances of interactive tech-
learning from media in the preschool years, especially from newer nologies might be particularly helpful for learning science and
technology platforms. math concepts via media. Encouragingly, Huber and colleagues
(2016) recently demonstrated that preschool-aged children were
able to learn how to complete a problem solving task on a
2.2. New learning opportunities from interactive technology touchscreen device and transfer that learning to a 3D physical
context. Problem solving is considered a building block of STEM, so
As noted, decades worth of research on children's learning from this points to the promise of STEM learning from interactive tech-
media has focused primarily on the impact of exposure to educa- nologies. While this study compared touchscreen learning to
tional television. More recently, though, there has been a growing tactile, three-dimensional learning, it did not compare touchscreen
sentiment that newly popular interactive technologies,1 such as learning to learning from more traditional, non-interactive media
platforms. The present study seeks to address this gap in our
understanding.
1
We define an interactive technology as one that invites the child to physically
manipulate the platform in order to advance the action and is contingent to the
child's manipulations. Because tablets and touchscreens are by far the most ubiq-
uitous platforms in American households that meet these criteria, we will focus our
discussion on these platforms.
 F. Alade et al. / Computers in Human Behavior 62 (2016) 433e441 435

3. Theoretical framework version of the game (H2). To address these hypotheses, we have
utilized a between-subjects experimental design to investigate the
3.1. How children learn from interactive technology role of interactivity in children's learning of a foundational STEM
skill.
There are several educational and developmental theories that
suggest that physical experience is an integral part of learning. For
4. Method
example, experiential learning theory (Kolb, 2014; Kolb & Fry, 1974)
is a learner-centered model of education, where learning is defined
4.1. Participants
as a cyclical process of action and reflection. Distinct from more
traditional rote or didactic learning, in which the learner plays a
Efforts were made to include participants from a variety of
passive role, experiential learning is the process of learning through
geographic areas in the United States in order to increase gener-
experience, or learning by doing. Likewise, educational practices
alizability. Thus, participants were recruited in one of three ways.
that are based on experiential learning theory encourage hands-on
Forty-three percent of participants (N ¼ 27) were recruited through
activities that allow learners to directly manipulate and engage
a database of families in the Chicago area that had opted to receive
with the materials and reflect on that experience (Carver, 1996).
research participation notices. Thirty-eight percent were recruited
Recently, scholars have drawn on experiential learning theory
from a similar database in the New York City area. The remaining
when investigating game-based learning and serious games (De
18% were recruited from a preschool classroom in a small city
Freitas & Oliver, 2006; Kiili, 2005; Ruben, 1999). Kiili (2005) ar-
outside of Los Angeles. All recruitment and consent documents
gues that games provide a unique opportunity to utilize educa-
were approved by the host university's institutional review board.
tional theory in a fun and engaging context. Therefore, as long as
A total of 63 preschool-aged children participated in the study.
apps and interactive technologies are well designed from an
Of the 63 children whose parents granted consent, two were unable
educational standpoint, they should also allow for more experi-
to complete the testing session, and one was removed due to
ential learning than less hands-on platforms.
experimenter error. The final sample of 60 children (42% male)
Additionally, theories of embodiment (Clark, 2008; Varela,
ranged in age from 45 to 68 months (M ¼ 58.06, SD ¼ 7.00). Par-
Thompson, & Rosch, 1992) suggest that our physical bodies both
ticipants represented a fairly diverse sample in terms of both race/
aid and constrain how we interact with and reason about phe-
ethnicity and socioeconomic status. Table 1 presents demographic
nomena in the world. That is, our ideas, thoughts, and un-
information of the sample.
derstandings are shaped by our prior and ongoing physical
experiences. Embodiment has been a useful framework for un-
derstanding mathematics learning and reasoning (Kontra, Lyons, 4.2. Procedure
Fischer, & Beilock, 2015; Trninic & Abrahamson, 2012). For
example, Kontra et al. (2015) found that college students who had a Participants were randomly assigned to one of three conditions.
brief physical experience with science content performed better on In all three conditions, the stimulus material was displayed on a
a written quiz about that content than their peers who did not have touchscreen tablet (Microsoft Surface 2). Participants in the inter-
the physical experience. The authors explain that the activation of active condition (N ¼ 20) played an interactive game that teaches
sensorimotor brain systems supports more efficient learning, and
they argue that science concepts are particularly well suited for
Table 1
learning via physical experience. Extending this idea of learning via Sample demographics.
physical experience, scholars have begun to examine the ways in
Variable Min. Max. Mean (SD) Percent
which interactions with touchscreens may impact learning. Spe-
cifically, researchers are interested in how learners organize Child's age in months 45 68 58.06 (7.00)
Child's sex
themselves and use their bodies when interacting with touch-
Males 41.7
screens (Fleck et al., 2009; Marshall, 2007; Marshall et al., 2009; Females 58.3
Piper, Friedman, & Hollan, 2012; Rick, Rogers, Haig, & Yuill, 2009). Child race/ethnicity
In a similar vein, research on child development emphasizes White 51.7
that children are better able to learn science and math concepts Black 11.7
Hispanic 15.0
when they are presented in multiple modalities (Bosse, Jacobs, & Asian/Pacific islander 8.3
Anderson, 2009; Gelman, Brenneman, Macdonald, & Roma n, Multi-racial/other 13.3
2009; National Science Teachers Association, 2014). Technology is Parent's relationship to child
one way to add the haptic modality to a learning experience. Mother 73.3
Father 13.3
Indeed, prior research suggests that haptic feedback is particularly
Other 13.3
useful for learning STEM concepts because it provides more of a Parent's age in years 21 48 36.25 (6.89)
“real-life” experience and a more immersive learning environment Parent's education
(Hamza-Lup & Stanescu, 2010; Han & Black, 2011; Minogue & High school/GED 1.7
Jones, 2006). Some college 10.0
Bachelor's degree 26.7
In summary, major learning theories suggest that interactive Master's degree 43.3
media can serve as a useful platform for children to learn and Advanced degree 6.7
practice new skills. Building on previous work (e.g., Fisch, 2003, Household income
2009; Kirkorian & Pempek, 2013), we hypothesize that children Less than 10,000 5
10,000e14,999 1.7
who engage with an educational game that teaches measuring,
15,000e24,999 10.0
through either an interactive or non-interactive experience, will 25,000e49,999 6.7
show evidence of learning above and beyond that of children in a 50,000e99,999 20.0
baseline context (H1). Moreover, we contend that children who 100,000e149,999 18.3
engage with the game in an interactive way will exhibit greater 150,000e199,999 3.3
200,000 or more 20.0
evidence of learning than peers who engage with a non-interactive
436 F. Alade et al. / Computers in Human Behavior 62 (2016) 433e441

correct number of objects to the scaffold line. Each child in the

interactive treatment condition played three trials of the game,
measuring the length and width of three different animals.
In order to create a video version of this game for the non-
interactive treatment condition, researchers used Camtasia Studio
to record a screen capture while playing the game. Murray's
interactive audio prompts were subsequently decoupled from the
screen capture. The result was a video stimulus, where viewers
would see and hear content that was identical to the interactive
condition, except for the presence of Murray's interactive audio
prompts. Participants in the non-interactive condition watched this
video version of the game on the touchscreen tablet to maintain
fidelity with the interactive condition in terms of the size of the
Fig. 1. Screen shot from stimulus game Measure That Animal. viewing screen and the overall experience. However, the video was
not responsive to touch, effectively disabling the interactive
component of the touchscreen. Three different versions of the
approximate measuring, a STEM-related concept that is considered video were created to account for the random order of animals that
fundamental to math and science learning (Solomon, Vasilyeva, is presented in the game. They were then rotated to control for
Huttenlocher, & Levine, 2015; Sophian, 2007). Participants in the potential order effects among the participants.
non-interactive video condition (N ¼ 20) viewed a video recorded Participants in the control condition played a similar game,
version of the game that was otherwise identical in content to the called “Murray Cleans Up,” which does not feature any kind of
interactive game. Participants in the control condition (N ¼ 20) measuring lesson, but is otherwise identical in production quality
played a non-STEM related game that was otherwise very similar to and style to the target stimulus. In this online game, which is also
the target stimulus in that it used the same character and similar created by Sesame Workshop, the same character, Murray Monster,
interactive features. is introduced as a zookeeper who needs help washing the zoo
A trained researcher conducted the experiment with each in- animals. He instructs the child to click on different body parts of the
dividual child participant in a quiet location. The researcher ob- animals in order to clean them up. As with the interactive treat-
tained informed consent from all parents and verbal assent from ment condition, participants in the control group played three trials
each child participant before beginning the study. As a warm up, of the game, washing three different animals.
the researcher engaged the child in a few activities to assess the “Murray Cleans Up” was chosen as the control stimulus because
child's verbal ability, counting, and familiarity with certain media it mirrors the target stimulus in three primary ways. First, the
characters. Immediately following this warm-up, the child played featured character in both games is Murray, a lesser-known Sesame
or viewed their randomly assigned stimulus on a tablet computer. Street character. In both games, Murray is introduced as a
Following exposure, children completed assessments of enjoyment zookeeper who needs help with the zoo animals. Since character
and character appeal before, finally, completing a knowledge interaction can have great effects on children's experiences with a
transfer task. Parents of participating children completed an online program (Calvert, Richards, & Kent, 2014; Gola, Richards, Lauricella,
survey about the child's media habits, general behavior, and family & Calvert, 2013; Hoffner, 1996; Wainwright & Linebarger, 2007), we
demographics. Parents did not intervene during the child's partic- felt it important to keep the main character consistent across
ipation. All testing sessions were video and audio recorded so that conditions. Second, in both games, children are interacting with
trained coders could score each of the assessments. animals (either measuring or cleaning them), keeping the sec-
ondary characters in the game consistent as well. Third, in both
4.3. Stimuli games, the interactive technology works in nearly identical ways,
such that children are instructed to help Murray by touching and
The target stimulus was an online game created by Sesame moving objects in the game to achieve an outcome, either
Workshop entitled “Measure That Animal,” which is designed to measuring an animal or cleaning an animal.
teach young children about measuring. This was deemed an
appropriate STEM-related concept to be used as the target skill in 4.4. Measures
this study because understanding both standard and non-standard
measurement units is critical to mathematics and science learning 4.4.1. Verbal ability
(Sophian, 2007; Wilson & Rowland, 1993). Moreover, measuring is The Picture Naming Individual Growth and Development Indi-
a concept that young American children often find challenging cator (Missall & McConnell, 2004) was used as a measure of verbal
(Lehrer, 2003; National Center for Education Statistics, 2013). ability. The Picture Naming task is an expressive vocabulary mea-
In “Measure That Animal,” Murray Monster is introduced as a sure that has been shown to be sensitive to children's development
zookeeper who needs to measure zoo animals, but Murray forgot and correlates with other standardized measures of language
his measuring tape at home. A basket of household objects (e.g., development and literacy (Missall & McConnell, 2004). To com-
baseball caps, stinky socks, etc.) appears on the screen beside a plete the Picture Naming task, each child was presented with
novel animal (e.g. gorilla, giraffe, penguin, etc.).2 Murray asks the flashcards of color pictures of objects (e.g., food, animals, household
player to use the objects to help him measure “how tall” and then objects, clothing) and asked to name as many as they can. The
“how long” the animal is. For each measuring opportunity, a scaf- number of pictures named correctly in 1 min served as the child's
fold line appears to guide the child in understanding the di- verbal ability score (M ¼ 19.07, SD ¼ 5.86, Range ¼ 7 to 31) (Missall
mensions of height and length (see Fig. 1). Players must drag the & McConnell, 2004).

4.4.2. Knowledge transfer

2
Both the household objects and the animals are randomly selected by the Because the ability to transfer learning from one context to
game's internal algorithm. another is an adaptive skill that develops during early childhood,
 F. Alade et al. / Computers in Human Behavior 62 (2016) 433e441 437

knowledge transfer tasks are commonly used to assess children's maximum score of 8 (i.e., 4 points for each dimension). Two trained
ability to take what they've learned in a mediated context and coders, blind to condition, scored each of these tasks (Krippen-
apply it to a similar real world context (Barr, 2010). Thus, for our dorff's a ¼ 0.91). Scores at each level of difficulty were averaged to
dependent measure, we developed a knowledge transfer task obtain an overall composite score for transfer of knowledge.
modeled after those used by Barr and colleagues (Barr, 2010;
Vandewater, Barr, Park, & Lee, 2010; Zack et al., 2009, 2013) to 5. Results
assess children's ability to measure with non-standard units (i.e.,
the lesson taught in the target stimulus). Children were assessed at 5.1. Analysis plan
three levels: near transfer, medium transfer, and far transfer.
At each level of transfer, the child was asked to use a household Age, gender, verbal ability, parent's education, and household
item (i.e., Legos, circles, erasers) as a non-standard unit to measure income were tested as potential covariates. Age was the only sig-
the height and length of the animal or object on the page in front of nificant predictor of performance on the knowledge transfer task
them. In the near transfer assessment, each child was presented and was, therefore, included in all subsequent analyses as a co-
with a color picture of a duck and ten Lego pieces, all of the same variate. Analyses of covariance (ANCOVA) were conducted to test
size. The picture had an accompanying scaffold line from top-to- the hypotheses that participants in both treatment groups would
bottom to demonstrate the correct direction of measurement. learn more from their experiences than participants in the control
Replicating the language used by Murray in the stimulus, the condition (H1) and that participants in the interactive condition
researcher asked each child to “use the Legos to measure how tall would learn best from their unique experience (H2).
the duck is.” The child was given unlimited time to place the Legos
on the paper to measure the duck and to count the Legos in order to
5.2. Transfer of knowledge
answer the researcher's question. Next, the child was shown a
second picture of the same duck with the scaffold line drawn from
The first ANCOVA model tested the effect of condition on par-
left-to-right. During this trial, the child was asked to “use the Legos
ticipants’ overall composite score on the transfer task while con-
to measure how long the duck is.” This task was considered near
trolling for the effect of age. There was a statistically significant
transfer because it was very similar to the stimulus in that the child
difference in overall transfer score between the conditions,
measured an animal and was guided by a scaffold line.
F(2,56) ¼ 4.58, p ¼ 0.01, partial h2 ¼ 0.14 (see Table 2). Post-hoc
In the medium transfer assessment, the child saw a color picture
comparisons revealed that participants in the interactive and
of a dog without any scaffold lines and was asked to measure how
non-interactive conditions scored higher on the overall composite
tall and how long the dog was using ten plastic poker chips (called
score than their peers in the control group (p ¼ 0.03 and p ¼ 0.01,
circles). The removal of the scaffolding line made this task some-
respectively). However, there was no statistically significant dif-
what more difficult than the near transfer task, but the use of an
ference between participants in the interactive and non-interactive
animal kept some consistency with the stimulus. Finally, in the far
conditions (p ¼ 0.52).
transfer assessment, the child saw a color picture of a robot and was
Since overall performance decreased as the transfer task became
asked to measure how tall and how long the robot was using ten
more difficult, we used analyses of covariance to assess perfor-
large erasers. This was the most challenging task because neither of
mance at each level of transfer.
the context clues from the stimulus were present; there was no
scaffold line, and the child measured a robot rather than an animal.
See Fig. 2 for sample images of each transfer level. 5.2.1. Near transfer
Participants were asked to measure the height and length of a
picture of a duck on a scaffold line using Lego pieces. There was a
4.4.2.1. Coding. The child's performance was scored on a four-point statistically significant difference between conditions, such that
rubric designed to capture various levels of understanding and F(2,56) ¼ 3.39, p ¼ 0.04, partial h2 ¼ 0.11. Pair-wise comparisons
ability. Dichotomous scores (yes ¼ 1 or no ¼ 0) were given for each revealed that participants in the interactive condition scored higher
of the following: (1) attempt to measure (i.e., Did the child on this task than children in the control condition (p ¼ 0.02). There
demonstrate understanding of what it means to measure by placing was a marginally significant difference between participants in the
the measuring objects in a straight line?); (2) correct measurement non-interactive condition and their peers in the control condition,
direction (i.e., Did the child measure either height or length (p ¼ 0.06). Lastly, there was no difference in performance between
appropriately?); (3) correct placement (i.e., Did the child correctly participants in the interactive condition and their counterparts in
place non-standard units on the page (e.g., either edge-to-edge or the non-interactive condition (p ¼ 0.58) (see Table 2).
close together but not overlapping) when measuring?); (4) count-
ing (i.e., Did the child accurately count the number of non-standard 5.2.2. Medium transfer
units placed on the page, regardless of the number of non-standard Participants were asked to measure the height and length of a
units needed to achieve a correct answer?). At each level of the picture of a dog using plastic circles with no scaffold line present.
transfer task (near, medium, and far), a child could receive a There was a statistically significant difference between conditions,

Fig. 2. Near, medium, and far transfer images.

438 F. Alade et al. / Computers in Human Behavior 62 (2016) 433e441

Table 2
Covariate adjusted group means across levels of transfer.

Interactive (N ¼ 20) Non-interactive (N ¼ 20) Control (N ¼ 20) All (N ¼ 60)

Adjusted mean (SE) Adjusted mean (SE) Adjusted mean (SE) M (SD)

Overall transfer 18.46 (0.86)* 19.25 (0.86)** 15.75 (0.86) 17.82 (4.23)
Near transfer 6.92 (0.28)* 6.70 (0.28)þ 5.93 (0.28) 6.52 (1.38)
Medium transfer 6.07 (0.32)* 6.40 (0.32)** 5.13 (0.32) 5.87 (1.56)
Far transfer 5.47 (0.41) 6.15 (0.41)* 4.69 (0.41) 5.43 (1.91)
þ
¼ p < 0.10, *p < 0.05, **p < 0.01.
Note: Table presents estimates of group means controlling for age. Differences are compared to the control group.

such that F(2,56) ¼ 4.30, p ¼ 0.02, partial h2 ¼ 0.13. Pair-wise While it is important to demonstrate that children can learn
comparisons revealed that participants in both the interactive from mediated experiences, an additional goal of this study was to
and non-interactive conditions scored higher on this measuring examine the unique effect of interactivity on children's learning, as
task than those in the control condition (p ¼ 0.04 and p ¼ 0.01, few studies have directly compared interactive and non-interactive
respectively). Again, there was no difference in performance be- mediated experiences. While there was no difference in perfor-
tween participants in the interactive and non-interactive condi- mance between participants in the interactive and non-interactive
tions (p ¼ 0.47) (see Table 2). conditions for overall transfer, follow-up analyses, which divided
the composite score based on level of difficulty of the transfer task,
5.2.3. Far transfer resulted in an interesting pattern of findings. For near transfer,
Participants were asked to measure the height and length of a where the task was most closely aligned with the content of the
picture of a robot using large erasers without a scaffold line. There learning experience, participants in the interactive condition
was a statistically significant difference in scores between the scored higher than children in the control group (see Table 2). At
conditions, such that F(2,56) ¼ 3.24, p ¼ 0.04, partial h2 ¼ 0.10. the medium level of transfer, where the scaffold lines were
Interestingly, we found a pattern of results opposite to those found removed, participants in both the interactive and non-interactive
in the near transfer situation. Pair-wise comparisons revealed that conditions score higher than participants in the control group. At
participants in the non-interactive, rather than interactive, condi- the farthest level of transfer, where the task was most different
tion scored higher on this measuring task than those in the control from the stimulus material in that the scaffold lines were removed
condition (p ¼ 0.01 and p ¼ 0.18, respectively). There was no and the child was asked to measure a novel object, participants in
difference in performance between participants in the interactive the non-interactive condition performed better than participants in
and non-interactive conditions (p ¼ 0.24) (see Table 2). the control condition, while those in the interactive condition did
not. These findings suggest that interactivity may be most helpful in
6. Discussion contexts that are highly similar to the original learning context, but
may not have a lasting effect once the transfer task becomes too far
Using a between subjects experimental design, we tested removed from the original learning context.
whether preschool children could learn a foundational STEM skill When attempting to understand how young children learn from
via an educational app (H1) and whether the interactive features of media, it is important to consider the cognitive effort required to
that technology would uniquely support learning (H2). Our findings comprehend the information being presented in 2D form (video or
suggest that child-targeted educational media can support pre- touchscreen) as well as the working memory capacity needed to
schoolers' learning of a novel measurement skill. Additionally, we successfully complete these tasks (see the discussion of children's
found that children's performance on the transfer task varied as a cognitive capacity in Fisch, 2004). Previous work has supported
function of the interactive media experience in different ways cognitive load theory as an underlying mechanism in the struggles
depending on the difficulty of the task. These two findings have that infants face when processing 2D content (e.g., Lauricella et al.,
implications for future studies of children's learning from media, as 2010; Zack et al., 2009, 2013). Cognitive load is often a consequence
well as the production of high-quality educational media experi- of increased emphasis on the peripheral elements of instruction
ences for preschool children. (Paas, Renkl, & Sweller, 2003; Sweller, 1988). Correspondingly,
Our first hypothesis was supported; children in both treatment Fisch (2004) argues that effective instructional material may facil-
groups scored significantly higher that their peers in the control itate learning by directing cognitive resources toward relevant
condition when the tasks were examined in aggregate. This is learning activities rather than elements of the material that might
consistent with previous research demonstrating that preschoolers be distracting.
are capable of learning from mediated experiences that are both This study is among the first to examine the unique impact of
educational and of high quality (e.g., Anderson et al., 2000; Thakkar, interactivity on children's learning. Our findings suggest that, un-
Garrison, & Christakis, 2006). Furthermore, these findings provide like identical non-interactive experiences, interactivity may place
evidence that preschoolers can learn from interactive gaming ex- undue burdens on young children's cognitive capabilities, particu-
periences on touchscreen devices. This is an important contribution larly when the child must transfer learning to novel situations (i.e.,
to a small but growing body of literature on children's learning far transfer). It could be that children in the interactive condition
from new technologies. Because of the great appeal of touchscreens devoted a significant portion of their limited working memory re-
and mobile devices for children, there has been a strong push to use sources to the physical requirements of manipulating the
these interactive technologies to support informal learning of STEM touchscreen during game play, negatively impacting their ability to
concepts starting at very young ages. Yet, little conclusive evidence attend to the general concept of measuring. Therefore, when the
has been shown in support of this idea. Our findings provide strong transfer task was very similar to the learning context, they excelled
empirical support for the assertion that young children can learn at the task because they were able to mimic the physical action that
foundational STEM skills from new media technologies and apply they focused on during gameplay. However, in far transfer, where
them to non-mediated contexts. they had to apply the very specific skill taught in the game to
 F. Alade et al. / Computers in Human Behavior 62 (2016) 433e441 439

dissimilar task, these participants were unable to apply the more learning experiences predicts later educational attainment, it has
general measuring concept as easily. Presumably, children in the become increasingly important to find ways to encourage STEM
non-interactive condition, who did not have to focus on the phys- learning in the early years. Opportunities for early STEM learning
ical manipulation of the game, were able to devote more working are often lacking in preschool classroom curricula, but there are
memory resources to absorbing the overall concept of measuring. opportunities for young children to engage in informal STEM
Therefore, when the task became a bit more difficult and more learning outside of the traditional classroom setting. Mobile games
removed from the exact experience they viewed, these participants and educational apps that feature STEM content are becoming
were still able to apply what they learned from viewing the more widely available. When well designed, this technology can
educational material. offer meaningful opportunities for young children to engage with
Alternatively, it could be that interacting with a touchscreen STEM content, learn through exploration, and practice newly ac-
increases the salience of the screen itself, thus binding the educa- quired skills.
tional material to the on-screen context. This idea is supported by Despite this established potential, there is little empirical evi-
DeLoache's dual representation theory (DeLoache, 1991, 2000), dence to suggest that these technologies promote learning. More-
which suggests that increasing the physical salience of a model over, the context in which this learning occurs is largely unknown.
makes it more difficult for young children to appreciate its symbolic This study contributes to our understanding of the relationship
representation. DeLoache (2000) found that decreasing the phys- between interactivity and learning by demonstrating that educa-
ical salience of a scale model by placing it behind a window made it tional technology, whether interactive or non-interactive, can be a
easier for young children to understand the symbolic representa- successful tool for teaching preschool-aged children STEM-related
tion of the model and use that understanding to successfully concepts and skills.
complete a memory retrieval task. Yet, increasing the physical Fueled by the potential of educational technology to support
salience of the model by having children manipulate it in their science and math achievement, there has been a strong push by
hands made it more difficult for the children to utilize the model's federal and state governments to bring interactive technologies
symbolic representation in the memory retrieval task. into all classrooms (US Department of Education, 2010). School
In the current study, we may have effectively increased the districts around the country are spending millions of dollars to
physical salience of the tablet by encouraging children to touch and equip early childhood classrooms with touchscreen tablets (Jones,
manipulate it with their hands, making it more difficult for them to 2013). However, the results from this study suggest that the
think of the tablet as a learning tool and apply the presented in- contribution of interactivity to learning should not be overstated
formation to new contexts. It is important to note that the transfer given the absence of additional evidence. It may be that more
tasks increased in difficulty in two ways. First, while scaffold lines traditional experiences, like those provided by video technology,
were present in the near transfer task, they were removed for both can, in certain contexts, be just as useful in supporting STEM
the medium and far transfer tasks. Second, contextual change also learning for preschoolers.
occurred over the three transfer tasks. During the near and medium On the other hand, the patterns of results at each transfer level
transfer tasks, the participants were asked to measure pictures of do suggest that interactivity may support learning under particular
animals, maintaining consistency with the zoo theme present in circumstances. Our findings suggest that interactivity is most
the stimulus. For the far transfer task, however, the context helpful to young children when the learning context very closely
changed in that participants were required to measure a non- mirrors the real-world setting. This is useful information for media
animal. According to this theory of screen salience, it could be producers, who may want to strategize by focusing their interactive
that for participants in the interactive condition, their learning was efforts on skills and topics that have very similar transfer goals,
so bound to the on-screen context that they struggled to apply the while reserving broader conceptual lessons for more traditional
information to a dissimilar, non-animal context. media platforms. Likewise, parents and educators can use this in-
formation in choosing appropriate apps and technologies for their
6.1. Limitations children, considering specific skills or goals for learning.

This study is not without limitations. First, because the transfer 7. Conclusions and considerations for future research
tasks increased in difficulty in two ways, context and scaffolding
support, it is difficult to determine which factors may have caused There is still much to discover with respect to the specific at-
the observed changes in performance across levels of difficulty. tributes of new digital technologies that are most critical to sup-
Second, these were highly controlled one-time exposures, in which porting children's learning. Many scholars and industry experts
participants played or watched the game for a relatively brief argue that the interactivity of these technologies is key, but our
period of time. Previous research has demonstrated that young findings suggest that interactivity may help under certain circum-
children learn through repetition and often play games and watch stances and hinder in others. Future research should seek to
media content repeatedly (Crawley et al., 2002; Mares, 2006). discover the mechanisms by which interactivity influences
Therefore, it is unclear how learning may differ when exposure learning, so that we might achieve a better, more nuanced under-
occurs in a more naturalistic setting. Third, the stimulus games standing of the boundaries of the relationship between inter-
were originally developed for a desktop or laptop computer, rather activity and learning from digital media. With or without the
than a touchscreen device. As a result, the manual manipulation interactive component, it does seem that well-designed educa-
was a bit less intuitive than in apps that are designed specifically for tional media can support foundational STEM learning for young
touchscreens. This may have contributed to an increase in cognitive children. When used in tandem with other forms of education and
load beyond what would have occurred in a more streamlined app. instruction, digital technologies may in fact contribute to children's
Future research aims to address these concerns. academic performance in the areas of science, technology, engi-
neering, and mathematics.
6.2. Practical implications
References
Given the United States’ current standings in math and science
performance (PISA, 2012), and the fact that the quality of early American Academy of Pediatrics. (2013). Policy statement: children, adolescents,
440 F. Alade et al. / Computers in Human Behavior 62 (2016) 433e441

and the media. Pediatrics, 132, 958e961. Huber, B., Tarasuik, J., Antoniou, M. N., Garrett, C., Bowe, S. J., & Kaufman, J. (2016).
Anderson, D. R., Bryant, J., Wilder, A., Santomero, A., Williams, M., & Crawley, A. M. Young children's transfer of learning from a touchscreen device. Computers in
(2000). Researching blue's clues: viewing behavior and impact. Media Psy- Human Behavior, 56, 56e64. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2015.11.010.
chology, 2, 179e194. http://dx.doi.org/10.1207/s1532785xmep0202_4. Jennings, N. A., Hooker, S. D., & Linebarger, D. L. (2009). Educational television as
Anderson, D. R., Huston, A. C., Schmitt, K. L., Linebarger, D. L., & Wright, J. C. (2001). mediated literacy environments for preschoolers. Learning, Media and Tech-
Early childhood television viewing and adolescent behavior: the recontact nology, 34, 229e242.
study. Monographs of the Society for Research in Child Development, 66, 1e143. Jones, B. (2013). LAUSD's iPad program moving to next phase. Retrieved from http://
http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/1540-5834.00121. www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/11/13/lausd-ipad-program_n_4266840.html.
Barr, R. (2010). Transfer of learning between 2D and 3D sources during infancy: Jones, T., & Brown, C. (2011). Reading engagement: a comparison between e-books
informing theory and practice. Developmental Review, 30, 128e154. and traditional print books in an elementary classroom. International Journal of
Bonawitz, E. B., van Schijndel, T. J., Friel, D., & Schulz, L. (2012). Children balance Instructional Media, 4, 5e22.
theories and evidence in exploration, explanation, and learning. Cognitive Psy- Kiili, K. (2005). Digital game-based learning: towards an experiential gaming
chology, 64, 215e234. model. The Internet and Higher Education, 8, 13e24.
Borzekowski, D. L. G., & Macha, J. E. (2010). The role of Kilimani Sesame in the Kirkorian, H. L., & Pempek, T. A. (2013). Toddlers and touch screens: potential for
healthy development of Tanzanian preschool children. Journal of Applied early learning? Zero to Three, 33, 32e37.
Developmental Psychology, 31, 298e305. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/ Kolb, D. A. (2014). Experiential learning: Experience as the source of learning and
j.appdev.2010.05.002. development. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Education.
Bosse, S., Jacobs, G., & Anderson, T. L. (2009). Science in the early years. Young Kolb, D. A., & Fry, R. E. (1974). Toward an applied theory of experiential learning.
Children, 64, 10e15. Cambridge, MA: MIT Alfred P. Sloan School of Management.
Brenneman, K. (2011). Assessment for preschool science learning and learning Kontra, C., Lyons, D. J., Fischer, S. M., & Beilock, S. L. (2015). Physical experience
environments. Early Childhood Research & Practice, 13, 1e9. enhances science learning. Psychological Science, 26, 737e749. http://dx.doi.org/
Brown, A., Shifrin, D. L., & Hill, D. L. (2015). Beyond 'turn it off': how to advise 10.1177/0956797615569355.
families on media use. AAP News, 36, 54. http://dx.doi.org/10.1542/aap- Krcmar, M., & Cingel, D. P. (2014). Parent-child joint reading in traditional and
news.20153610-54. electronic formats. Media Psychology, 17, 262e281. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/
Callanan, M. A., & Oakes, L. M. (1992). Preschoolers' questions and parents' expla- 15213269.2013.840243.
nations: causal thinking in everyday activity. Cognitive Development, 7, Lauricella, A. R., Barr, R., & Calvert, S. L. (2014). Parent-child interactions during
213e233. traditional and computer storybook reading for children's comprehension:
Calvert, S. L., Richards, M. N., & Kent, C. C. (2014). Personalized interactive characters implications for electronic storybook design. International Journal of Child-
for toddlers' learning of seriation from a video presentation. Journal of Applied Computer Interaction, 2, 17e25.
Developmental Psychology, 35, 148e155. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/ Lauricella, A. R., Pempek, T. A., Barr, R., & Calvert, S. L. (2010). Contingent computer
j.appdev.2014.03.004. interactions for young children's object retrieval success. Journal of Applied
Carey, S. (1985). Conceptual change in childhood. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. Developmental Psychology, 31(5), 362e369.
Carver, R. (1996). Theory for practice: a framework for thinking about experimental Lehrer, R. (2003). Developing understanding of measurement. In J. Kilpatrick,
education. Journal of Experiential Education, 19, 8e13. W. G. Martin, & D. E. Schifter (Eds.), A research companion to principles and
Clark, A. (2008). Supersizing the mind: Embodiment, action, and cognitive extension. standards for school mathematics (pp. 179e192). Reston, VA: NCTM.
New York: Oxford University Press. Linebarger, D. L., Kosanic, A. Z., Greenwood, C. R., & Doku, N. S. (2004). Effects of
Crawley, A. M., Anderson, D. R., Santomero, A., Wilder, A., Williams, M., & viewing the television program between the lions on the emergent literacy
Evans, M. K. (2002). Do children learn how to watch television? the impact of skills of young children. Journal of Educational Psychology, 96, 297e308. http://
extensive experiences with Blue's Clues on preschool children's television dx.doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.96.2.297.
viewing behavior. Journal of Communication, 52, 267e280. Mares, M.-L. (2006). Repetition increases children's comprehension of television
De Freitas, S., & Oliver, M. (2006). How can exploratory learning with games and content, up to a point. Communication Monographs, 73, 216e241.
simulations within the curriculum be most effectively evaluated? Computers & Mares, M.-L., & Woodard, E. (2005). Positive effects of television on children's social
Education, 46, 249e264. interactions: a meta-analysis. Media Psychology, 7, 301e322.
DeLoache, J. S. (1991). Symbolic functioning in very young children: understanding Marshall, P. (2007). Do tangible interfaces enhance learning?. In Paper presented at
of pictures and models. Child Development, 62, 736e752. the proceedings of the 1st international conference on Tangible and embedded
DeLoache, J. S. (2000). Dual representation and young children's use of scale interaction.
models. Child Development, 329e338. Marshall, P., Fleck, R., Harris, A., Rick, J., Hornecker, E., Rogers, Y., … Dalton, N. S.
Dingwall, R., & Aldridge, M. (2006). Television wildlife programming as a source of (2009). Fighting for control: children's embodied interactions when using
popular scientific information: a case study of evolution. Public Understanding of physical and digital representations. In Paper presented at the proceedings of the
Science, 15, 131e152. CHI conference on human factors in computing systems, Boston, MA.
Fisch, S. M. (2003). The impact of cyberchase on children's mathematical problem Minogue, J., & Jones, M. G. (2006). Haptics in education: exploring an untapped
solving (Retrieved from Teaneck, NJ). sensory modality. Review of Educational Research, 76, 317e348.
Fisch, S. M. (2004). Children's learning from educational television. Mahwah, New Missall, K. N., & McConnell, S. R. (2004). Psychometric characteristics of individual
Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum. growth and development indicators: Picture naming, rhyming, and alliteration
Fisch, S. M. (2009). Educational Television and interactive media for children: ef- (Retrieved from Minneapolis).
fects on academic knowledge, skills, and attitudes. In J. Bryant, & M. B. Oliver National Center for Education Statistics. (2013). NAEP questions. Retrieved from
(Eds.), Media effects: Advances in theory and research (3rd ed., pp. 402e435). http://nces.ed.gov/nationsreportcard/itmrls/startsearch.asp.
London: Routledge. National Center on Education and the Economy. (2008). Part 1: The nature of the
Fisch, S. M., & McCann, S. K. (1993). Making broadcast television participative: challenge now (Retrieved from San Francisco, CA).
eliciting mathematical behavior through Square One TV. Educational Technology National Science Teachers Association. (2014). NSTA position statement: Early
Research and Development, 41(3), 103e109. childhood science education (Arlington, VA).
Fleck, R., Rogers, Y., Yuill, N., Marshall, P., Carr, A., Rick, J., et al. (2009). Actions speak Paas, F., Renkl, A., & Sweller, J. (2003). Cognitive load theory and instructional
loudly with words: unpacking collaboration around the table. In Paper pre- design: recent developments. Educational Psychologist, 38, 1e4.
sented at the proceedings of the ACM international conference on interactive ta- Parette, H. P., Quesenberry, A. C., & Blum, C. (2010). Missing the boat with tech-
bletops and surfaces. nology usage in early childhood settings: a 21st century view of developmen-
Gelman, R., Brenneman, K., Macdonald, G., & Roma n, M. (2009). Preschool pathways tally appropriate practice. Early Childhood Education Journal, 37, 335e343.
to science (PrePS): Facilitating scientific ways of thinking, talking, doing, and un- Piper, A. M., Friedman, W., & Hollan, J. D. (2012). Setting the stage for embodied
derstanding. Baltimore, MD: Brooks Publishing. activity: scientific discussion around a multitouch tabletop display. Interna-
Ginsburg, H. P., & Golbeck, S. L. (2004). Thoughts on the future of research on tional Journal of Learning Technology, 7, 58e78.
mathematics and science learning and education. Early Childhood Research PISA. (2012). Performance of U.S. 15-year-old students in mathematics, science, and
Quarterly, 19, 190e200. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ecresq.2004.01.013. reading literacy in an international context (Retrieved from).
Gola, A. A. H., Richards, M. N., Lauricella, A. R., & Calvert, S. L. (2013). Building President's Council of Advisors on Science and Technology. (2009). Prepare and
meaningful parasocial relationships between toddlers and media characters to inspire: K-12 education in science, technology, engineering and math (STEM) ed-
teach early mathematical skills. Media Psychology, 16, 390e411. ucation for Americans' future. Washington, DC: Executive Office of the President,
Hamza-Lup, F. G., & Stanescu, I. A. (2010). The haptic paradigm in education: Office of Science and Technology Policy. Retrieved from http://www.
challenges and case studies. The Internet and Higher Education, 13, 78e81. whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/microsites/ostp/pcast-stemed-report.pdf.
Han, I., & Black, J. B. (2011). Incorporating haptic feedback in simulation for learning Rick, J., Rogers, Y., Haig, C., & Yuill, N. (2009). Learning by doing with shareable
physics. Computers & Education, 57, 2281e2290. interfaces. Children, Youth and Environments, 19, 320e341.
Hirsh-Pasek, K., Zosh, J. M., Golinkoff, R. M., Gray, J. H., Robb, M. B., & Kaufman, J. Rideout, V. (2013). Zero to eight: Children's media use in America 2013 (Retrieved
(2015). Putting education in “educational” apps: lessons from the science of from San Francisco, CA).
learning. Psychological Science in the Public Interest, 16, 3e34. http://dx.doi.org/ Rideout, V. (2014). Learning at home: Families' educational media use in America
10.1177/1529100615569721. (Retrieved from).
Hoffner, C. A. (1996). Children's wishful identification and parasocial interaction Ruben, B. D. (1999). Simulations, games, and experience-based learning: the quest
with favorite television characters. Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media, for a new paradigm for teaching and learning. Simulation & Gaming, 30,
40(3), 389e402. 498e505.
 F. Alade et al. / Computers in Human Behavior 62 (2016) 433e441 441

Solomon, T., Vasilyeva, M., Huttenlocher, J., & Levine, S. (2015). Minding the gap: Vandewater, E. A., Barr, R. F., Park, S. E., & Lee, S.-J. (2010). A US study of transfer of
children's difficulty conceptualizing spatial intervals as linear measurement learning from video to books in toddlers: matching words across context
units. Developmental Psychology, 51, 1564e1573. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/ change. Journal of Children and Media, 4, 451e467.
a0039707. Varela, F. J., Thompson, E., & Rosch, E. (1992). The embodied mind: Cognitive science
Sophian, C. (2007). The origins of mathematical knowledge in childhood. New York, and human experience. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
NY: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. Wainwright, D. K., & Linebarger, D. L. (2007). Characters and Cutaways, the impact on
Sweller, J. (1988). Cognitive load during problem solving: effects on learning. appeal and story comprehension (Retrieved from Philadelphia, PA).
Cognitive Science, 12, 257e285. http://dx.doi.org/10.1207/s15516709cog1202_4. Wartella, E., Rideout, V., Lauricella, A. R., & Connell, S. (2014). Revised parenting in
Thakkar, R. R., Garrison, M. M., & Christakis, D. A. (2006). A systematic review for the age of digital technology: A national survey (Retrieved from Evanston, IL).
the effects of television viewing by infants and preschoolers. Pediatrics, 118, Wilson, P. S., & Rowland, R. (1993). Teaching measurement. New York, NY: McMillan.
2025e2031. http://dx.doi.org/10.1542/peds.2006-1307. Zack, E., Barr, R., Gerhardstein, P., Dickerson, K., & Meltzoff, A. N. (2009). Infant
Trninic, D., & Abrahamson, D. (2012). Embodied artifacts and conceptual perfor- imitation from television using novel touch screen technology. British Journal of
mances. In Paper presented at the proceedings of the international conference of Developmental Psychology, 27, 13e26.
the learning sciences: Future of learning. Zack, E., Gerhardstein, P., Meltzoff, A. N., & Barr, R. (2013). 15-month-olds' transfer of
US Department of Education. (2010). Transforming American education: Learning learning between touch screen and real-world displays: language cues and
powered by technology. Washington, DC: Office of Educational Technology. cognitive loads. Scandinavian Journal of Psychology, 54, 20e25.
Retrieved from http://www.ed.gov/sites/default/files/netp2010.pdf.