Restricted accessResearch articleFirst published online 2015-03
The understanding of die as an object that has numerical functions. A longitudinal study using two children from the ages of 24 to 36 months interacting with an adult / La comprensión del dado como objeto con funciones numéricas. Un estudio longitudinal con dos niños desde los 24 a los 36 meses en interacción con un adulto
We investigated the process through which children understand the conventional use of numbers in interaction with an adult. We analysed previous semiotic systems that support, transform and adjust to this new semiotic system — the numerical — and we investigated the communicative-educative basis that makes it possible. We conducted an exploratory and longitudinal study with one boy and one girl at 24, 27, 30, 33 and 36 months of age in a triadic interaction (adult-child-object) with their mothers at home. We adopt the pragmatic-semiotic perspective of the object, which considers that triadic interactions are the unit of analysis of early development. Our results show a great variety of semiotic mediators used by children and adults and both children’s progressive comprehension of the meaning and use of the die as a numerical object.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
BatesE.BenigniL.BrethertonI.CamaioniL.VolterraV. (1979). The emergence of symbols: Cognition and communication in infancy. New York, NY: Academic Press.
2.
Blevins-KnabeB.Musun-MillerL. (1996). Number use at home by children and their parents and its relationship to early mathematical performance. Early Development and Parenting, 5, 35–45. doi:10.1002/(SICI)1099-0917(199603)5:1<35::AID-EDP113>3.0.CO;2-0
3.
ButterworthG. (1998). Origins of joint visual attention in infancy. Monographs of the Society for Research in Child Development, 63, 144–166. doi:10.1111/j.1540-5834.1998.tb02782.x
4.
CamaioniL.VolterraV.BatesE. (1978). La comunicazione nel primo anno di vita. Torino: Boringhieri.
5.
CavalcanteS. (2014). Quantification and use of numerical information up to two units in three- to four-year-old children / Cuantificación y uso de informaciones numéricas hasta dos unidades en niños de tres a cuatro años. Infancia y Aprendizaje, 37, 711–739. doi:10.1080/02103702.2014.977106
6.
ClarkH. (2003). Pointing and placing. In KitaS. (Ed.), Pointing. Where language, culture and cognition meet (pp. 243–268). Mahwah, NJ: LEA.
7.
GrahamT. (1999). The role of gesture in children’s learning to count. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 74, 333–355. doi:10.1006/jecp.1999.2520
8.
GrosseG.MollH.TomaselloM. (2010). 21-Month-olds understand the cooperative logic of requests. Journal of Pragmatics, 42, 3377–3383. doi:10.1016/j.pragma.2010.05.005
9.
LevineS.SuriyakhamL.RoweM.HuttenlocherJ.GundersonE. (2010). What counts in the development of young children’s number knowledge?Developmental Psychology, 46, 1309–1319. doi:10.1037/a0019671
10.
LiszkowskiU.CarpenterM.StrianoT.TomaselloM. (2006). 12- and 18-month-olds point to provide information for others. Journal of Cognition and Development, 7, 173–187. doi:10.1207/s15327647jcd0702_2
11.
ManolitsisG.GeorgiouG. K.TzirakiN. (2013). Examining the effects of home literacy and numeracy environment on early reading and math acquisition. Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 28, 692–703. doi:10.1016/j.ecresq.2013.05.004
12.
MartíE.ScheuerN.de la CruzM. (2013). Symbolic use of quantitative representations in young children. In BrizuelaM.GravelB. (Eds.), Show me what you know. Exploring representations across STEM disciplines (pp. 7–21). New York, NY: Teachers College Press.
13.
PalaciosP.RodríguezC. (2014). The development of symbolic uses of objects in infants in a triadic context: A pragmatic and semiotic perspective. Infant and Child Development, 24, 23–43 doi:10.1002/icd.1873
14.
RodríguezC. (2012). The functional permanence of the object: A product of consensus. In MartíE.RodríguezC. (Eds.), After piaget (pp. 123–150). New Brunswick, NJ: Transactions.
15.
RodríguezC.MoroC. (1998). El uso convencional también hace permanentes a los objetos. Infancia y Aprendizaje, 21, 67–83. doi:10.1174/021037098760378793
16.
RodríguezC.MoroC. (1999). El mágico número tres. Cuando los niños aún no hablan. Barcelona: Paidós.
17.
RodríguezC.MoroC. (2008). Coming to agreement: Object use by infants and adults. In ZlatevJ.RacineT.SinhaC.ItkonenE. (Eds.), The shared mind: Perspectives on intersubjectivity (pp. 89–114). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
18.
SchaefferB.EgglestonV. H.ScottJ. L. (1974). Number development in young children. Cognitive Psychology, 6, 357–379. doi:10.1016/0010-0285(74)90017-6
19.
SkwarchukS.SowinskiC.LeFevreJ. (2014). Formal and informal home learning activities in relation to children’s early numeracy and literacy skills: The development of a home numeracy model. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 121, 63–84. doi:10.1016/j.jecp.2013.11.006
20.
Young-LoveridgeJ. M. (1989). The relationship between children’s home experiences and their mathematical skills on entry to school. Early Child Development and Care, 43, 43–59. doi:10.1080/0300443890430105
