Shared reading: Interaction between parents and children in a natural setting

Leitura compartilhada: interação entre pais e filhos em situação natural

Abstract

Objective

The present study aimed to describe and analyze how parents naturally carry out shared reading with their children, without specific instructions. Additionally, the effect of a brief intervention to teach parents to use shared reading strategies was evaluated.

Method

Four families with children between the ages of four and five without a diagnosis of any disorder participated. We analyzed home footage captured by parents of shared reading moments, and to analyze the intervention, we measured the number of language stimulus strategies used by the parents as well as measures of the children's language.

Results

The description of the natural situation generated four categories of analysis: organization of the physical space, contact with the book, the way the story is told and the emotional relationship between parents and children. After the brief intervention, improvements were found in all measured variables when compared to pre-intervention data.

Conclusion

The importance of guiding families to use more language stimulation strategies in the context of shared reading is discussed, in order to enrich the child's speaking opportunities.

Keywords:
Child language; Parent-child relations; Reading

RESUMO

Objetivo

O presente estudo teve como objetivo descrever e analisar como os pais realizam a leitura compartilhada com seus filhos, naturalmente, sem instruções específicas. Adicionalmente, foi avaliado o efeito de uma intervenção breve para ensinar pais a usarem estratégias de leitura compartilhada.

Método

Participaram quatro famílias com crianças entre quatro e cinco anos sem diagnóstico de qualquer transtorno. Foram analisadas filmagens que os pais realizaram em suas casas de um momento de leitura compartilhada e para análise da intervenção foi mensurado o número de utilização das estratégias de estímulo da linguagem pelos pais e medidas de linguagem das crianças.

Resultados

A descrição da situação natural gerou quatro categorias de análise: organização do espaço físico, contato com o livro, forma como a história é contada e relação afetiva entre pais e filhos. Após a intervenção breve foram encontradas melhorias em todas as variáveis medidas quando comparadas aos dados pré-intervenção.

Conclusão

Discute-se a importância de orientar as famílias a utilizarem mais estratégias de estímulo de linguagem no contexto de leitura compartilhada, para enriquecer as oportunidades de fala da criança.

Palavras-chave:
Linguagem infantil; Relações pais-filho; Leitura

There is no doubt that language acquisition is strongly influenced by the environment, and that this acquisition is fundamental for the individual's later development. It is also known that some styles of adult-child interaction are more likely to promote language acquisition, as are collaborative activities (Levickis et al., 2018; Marjanovič-Umek et al., 2019).

Reading books to children, for example, is a well-known practice that achieves the goal of promoting oral and written language (Dowdall et al., 2020; Heidlage et al., 2020; Shahaeian et al., 2018). The practice of shared book reading can aid in the development of vocabulary and communicative skills of children in late kindergarten and early elementary school, as well as phonological awareness, oral language, and alphabet knowledge, which are predictor variables of later success in learning to read and write (Kotaman, 2020; Neuman & Dickinson, 2003).

Shared book reading involves an interaction between adults and children that has been seen to have greater potential for teaching skills that are important for later reading acquisition when compared to everyday conversations between them. Reading, especially sentence structures and the use of differentiated everyday words, can contribute to significantly enrich the child's linguistic repertoire (Milburn et al., 2014).

Considering the interface between Early Childhood Education, Educational Psychology, and Behavior Analysis, many studies have used the stimulus equivalence paradigm for teaching reading skills (Millan & Postalli, 2019; Neves et al., 2019; Silva et al., 2018). Faggian (2021) developed research that used shared reading to teach mathematical relations using the stimulus equivalence paradigm. Beyond mathematical relations, shared reading can be a very promising teaching context used by both teachers and family (Batista Rocha & Mota, 2022; Menotti et al., 2019).

Milburn and colleagues discuss that despite evident positive outcomes in the practice of shared reading, there are also significant variations in the ways it is implemented and has generated differential learning data in the children involved in the reading episodes (Milburn et al., 2014). For example, the amount and way in which questions are asked can influence engagement and also the child's understanding of the story. The same authors discuss that despite the existence of many studies related to the effectiveness of the shared reading activity, there are still few that have dedicated themselves to mapping in detail how this interaction between adults and children occurs, the possible variations, and the effectiveness of procedures aimed at guiding educators on how to perform this activity to maximize children's learning opportunities.

The study by Kohm et al. (2016) identified the importance of shared reading between adults and children for the development of imaginative, social, affective, and pro-social behavior, and social play. The child's active posture during shared reading favors such behaviors, as does the parent's behavior with use of props, asking questions, etc. By analyzing the interaction between parent and child during shared reading, it is possible to obtain indicators about its benefits for children.

In a systematic review on shared reading procedures, Fletcher and Reese (2005) highlighted the importance of the interaction between the parents' and children's behavior and the characteristics of the books to understand the quality of the shared reading episode and its potential for language promotion. These authors draw attention to the importance of a thorough analysis of the shared reading episode, as well as the characteristics of the parents, the children, and the interaction that exists between them.

When proposing an intervention in the context of shared reading, it is possible to establish multiple goals, such as improving the affective quality of the relationship between the adult and the child (Ganotice et al., 2016; Jimenez et al., 2019); developing the child's language (Akamoglu & Meadan, 2019; Colmar, 2014); stimulating imagination and creativity (Kohm et al., 2016); stimulating pro-social behaviors (Kohm et al, 2016); promoting the child's engagement and attention to the task (Blewitt & Langan, 2016); and reducing the emission of verbal responses that might not be compatible with the activity, among others.

Variables that involve the description and analysis of: (a) the physical space where the reading occurs, (b) when and how the contact with the book takes place, (c) how the story is told, and (d) the affection between parents and children during the shared reading, can provide clues as to how this interaction has been naturally used in the daily life of families and serve as a basis for planning a series of interventions that aim at teaching language to different audiences, with and without disabilities or disorders.

Working with families in their natural environments is essential for taking advantage of typical everyday situations to promote the child's development. The study by Domeniconi and Gracia (2018) aimed to implement and evaluate the effectiveness of an intervention focused on the development of communicative skills in children from four families. The intervention involved communicative activities between the parents and the researchers. After the comparison between pre- and post-intervention measures, the results identified a greater number of communicative strategies (e.g., clarification, expansion, allowing time and space for children to participate in the conversation, maintaining open and directed conversations for children) used by parents in the home context assessed by the Escala de Valoración de la Lengua Oral en contexto Familiar (EVALOF, Scale for Rating Oral Language Teaching in the Family Context, Domeniconi et al., 2017). Also, of a total of five participating children, four obtained a higher performance in the final oral language tests compared to the pre-test.

Considering the importance of parent-child interaction in shared reading moments for the promotion of oral and, later, written language, and the need to map which strategies families use during reading, the present study aims to describe and analyze how parents carry out shared reading with their children, naturally, without specific instructions. Additionally, a brief intervention was carried out to guide the family on the use of additional strategies throughout shared reading to stimulate the child's oral language, with the purpose of evaluating the effect of a brief intervention on parental behavior and children's language.

Method

Participants

Participating in the study were four families of children between four and five years old, without any medical diagnosis of disability or disorder. Table 1 characterizes these participants: the child, the mother, and the father. The selection criteria were family's availability and interest in participating in a study on shared reading between parents and children, and the child being between four and five years of age.

Table 1
Characterization of the participants

Family ID	Child’s age	Child's sex	Mother’s age	Mother’s education	Father’s age	Father’s education	Attending family member
F1	4y8m	Male	32	Middle/High School	-	-	Mother
F2	4y3m	Male	30	Middle/High School	32	Technical education	Father
F3	4y5m	Female	33	Incomplete Middle/High School	-	-	Mother
F4	5y1m	Male	35	Middle/High School	-	-	Mother

• Note: F1: Corresponds to Family 1; F2: To Family 2 and so on.

Procedure

Phase 1: Analysis of Parent-Child Interaction During Shared Reading in a Natural Home Situation

The researchers invited the families of children of a public school in a municipality located in the State of São Paulo. The invitation was done through the children's school diaries (a student diary used by the school for communicating general information with parents). Parents who were interested contacted the researcher, who then explained the objective of the research and asked the parents to record a video of a moment of shared reading in their usual natural setting. The video was then sent to the researchers.

Phase 2: Brief Intervention with Families

Families were invited to participate in an intervention to develop children's language through shared reading. An evaluation was conducted with the child, and the parents' reading moment with their children was analyzed. Then, the intervention with the parents was carried out, divided into three meetings, two in groups and one individual. After the meetings, parents were asked to read to their children over the following 15 days and record the date of reading and the book read. At the end, another evaluation was done with the child and of the family shared reading moment.

Pre- and Post-Intervention Assessments

The assessments sought to measure the occurrence of the parent behaviors that would be taught in the intervention, in addition to assessing the teaching of oral language using the EVALOF (Balog et al., 2022; Domeniconi et al., 2017). The number of communicative turns exchanged by adults and children were also measured. The material evaluated was the recording sent by the parents before and after intervention.

In addition to the videos, the expressive and receptive vocabulary test (Capovilla et al., 2011) was conducted in-person with the children and the number and variety of words used by the children in the shared reading episodes were counted. The measures used were (a) number of strategies used by the parents, (b) number of communicative turns, (c) number and variety of words used by the children, (d) EVALOF (Balog et al., 2022; Domeniconi et al., 2017), (e) expressive and receptive vocabulary test (Capovilla et al., 2011).

Intervention

The intervention was carried out in two parts, group and individual. The group intervention took place at the school where the children were studying. A meeting time was previously agreed with the interested parents and school management. Two meetings were held in the school's reading room. The first meeting had the objective of teaching three shared reading strategies for language stimulation: time delay, question, and use of pictures. In the second meeting, the previous concepts were reviewed, doubts were clarified, and the other two strategies were taught: expansion and explanation.

For teaching the strategies, the following sequence was used. Presentation of the target concept, with the researcher explaining what it means, providing examples with the support of power point slides. Then, the researcher provided models of strategy use with a physical book. Subsequently, she asked the parents' opinion and if it would be possible to perform such a strategy with their child and what might be the difficulties. The researcher and the group then talked about the applications of the strategy in reality. Once the discussions were over, the teaching of the next strategy would begin. At the end of the meetings the parents were asked to use the strategies learned with their children at home and comment on the experience at the next meeting. Each meeting lasted an hour.

At the end of the two group meetings, a third meeting was held at the homes of the participating families with the objective of clarifying aspects that were unclear during the group intervention and provide feedback on the behaviors taught in the environment where reading occurred naturally. To this end, the researcher previously arranged a time with the parents. Upon arriving at the home, the researcher would have a pleasant conversation with the family so that they would feel more comfortable with his/her presence, trying to establish a relaxed atmosphere to the meeting. Afterwards, the researcher asked the participant to choose a book and asked how he or she was using the strategies taught, providing feedback in the form of praise for their use. At the end, the participants' questions regarding the strategies and the research in general were answered. The individual meeting lasted approximately 30 minutes. The interval between meetings was one week.

Data Analysis

The footage sent by the families during Phase 1 was analyzed qualitatively, considering: (a) the participants' disposition in the physical space and their interaction with the environment, (b) when and how the contact with the book took place, (c) the way the story was told, and d) how the affective relationship between the family and the children occurred during the activity.

The data analysis of Phase 2 was done by analyzing the videos and transcribing the audios. The parents' target behaviors were measured and analyzed: (a) time delay; (b) question; (c) use of pictures; (d) expansion; and (e) explanation. As indirect dependent variables, the following were measured and analyzed: (a) number of communicative turns; (b) number and variety of words used by children; (c) EVALOF (Balog et al., 2022; Domeniconi et al., 2017); and (d) expressive and receptive vocabulary test (Capovilla et al., 2011).

The reliability of the data was measured by means of inter-observer agreement analysis. The results of filling out the observation protocol (containing each parent's target behavior, the amount of communicative turns, and the number and variety of words used by the children) were compared with another trained researcher. The index was calculated by considering the number of concordances in each variable for each family pre- and post-intervention, divided by the sum of the concordances and disagreements, multiplied by 100 [C/(C+D)]*100 (Kazdin, 2011). The interobserver agreement rate was 82.6%, indicating good reliability of the records.

The present study was approved by the Ethics Committee on Human Research of the Universidade Federal de São Carlos (CAAE: 55340016.0.0000.5504, opinion number 2.110.235).

Results

The analysis of the footage for Phase 1 is presented in Tables 2 and 3. The proposal was to understand shared reading in a home setting, in relation to the environmental context in which it was performed, the interaction with the book, and the affective relationship established between the dyad (Table 2). When analyzing the environmental setting of the four families, two setups stood out: a) a table and chair arrangement facing each other (F1) and a chair-side-by-side configuration (F4), and b) a bed (F2 and F3). In two environments, interactions with a domestic animal (F2) and a teddy bear (F3) were visualized during the shared reading. The analysis of the interaction with the book showed that during the shared reading all families were responsible for using and handling it. F4 got their child involved prior to beginning the shared reading, while F1 involved their child after the shared reading. The most representative affective relationship in the footage was the act of smiling between the parent and child.

Table 2
Description of the analysis of the footage to understand the environmental context, the interaction with the book, and the affective relationship between mothers and children

Family ID	Environment: What was the physical space like and how did the interaction with the space occur?	Book: When and how does the contact with the book happen?	Affectivity: How is the affective relationship between mothers and children?
F1	The child was sitting in a children's chair with their arms resting on a children's table, and the mother was sitting on the other side, facing the child. On the table there is a book which the mother then holds up to read. The child keeps her hand on her mouth. After reading, the child looks around.	At first, the book is facing the mother, who is reading. The child then gets up from the chair and leans over the book, looking at the pages. The mother turned the book so that it would face both of them during reading. The mother turned the pages. The child looked at the book until the end of the reading. Then the child handled the book, turned the pages, and left it facing towards them.	Child smiles slightly at the beginning of reading and then remains serious.
F2	The child was next to his father on a single bed. There was a cat on the child's lap. The lighting was bright. The father and child pet the cat.	The book was on the father's lap, who shows it to the child. The child looked at the book and at times pointed at the pictures.	The child and the father smiled several times throughout the shared reading and seemed to enjoy the activity.
F3	The daughter was lying on the bed with her back to her mother. There was a blanket over the child and a teddy bear. The mother was sitting on the edge of the bed.	The mother was holding the book throughout the reading and the daughter did not make eye contact with the book.	At the end of the story, the child turns to the mother, who kisses her on the forehead, says "Good night", and pulls the sheet over her daughter. The child smiles.
F4	Son and mother were sitting side by side at a table.	Before the reading began, the son was holding the book in his hand, leafing through it. During the reading, the mother held the book. The son maintained eye contact with the book until the end of the story.	The mother smiled a few times when the son answered her questions.

• Note: F1: Corresponds to Family 1; F2: To Family 2 and so on.

To analyze the strategies used by parents during the shared reading with children, Table 3 was elaborated. In general, based on a previous study (Domeniconi et al., 2017) on oral language assessment, eight categories used by families were identified, they are: reading without interruptions (F1), asking the child questions about the story (F1, F3, and F4), answering question asked by the child (F1, F2), asking the child to retell the story (F1), providing feedback to the child on how to tell the story (F1), explaining and synthesizing the story (F2, F3), relating the story to the child's daily life (F2), using pictures to tell the story (F4).

Table 3
Description of the strategies used by mothers in shared reading

Family ID	In what way is the story told?
F1	The mother reads the book without interruption. After reading, the son asked a question and the mother answered. The mother asked the child to tell the story "the way Mommy told it". The child began to tell the story, looking at the pictures in the book. The mother would then say "calm down, tell it slowly for mommy". The child told the story again and the mother helped, telling some parts of the story and asking questions, for example "Little Red Riding Hood went to the woods, right? What happened?" In what way is the story told?
F2	The father started reading, looking at his son during the story and excitedly responding to his son's communicative initiations. The father explained the story by relating the pictures, "His name is Apollo, look here, but he thinks he is called 'no'. Because they yell 'no' when he's doing something wrong". At the end of the reading, the father related the content of the story to the cat on the child's lap: "It's a good thing that Nemo doesn't do something wrong (like the dog in the book), otherwise we would yell 'no' to him (like the characters in the book say to the dog)".
F3	The mother read the book and asked questions between the pages, for example "Daughter, where did she put her little baby?". At the end, the mother summarized the story "Did you understand, daughter? Jesus was born and they were very happy, his mother had nowhere to put him and put him in the manger, everyone was happy when Jesus was born".
F4	The mother explained to her son that the filming was part of a research project. The mother did not read the story, she flipped through the book asking her son questions about the pictures. The two told the story, based on the pictures. The mother started the story by asking her son "In the little book, what are you seeing here? (and points to the cover of the book)", the son says, "A chicken that laid an egg", and the mother replied, "An egg, very good", and turned the page and asked again what was in the next picture.

• Note: F1: Corresponds to Family 1; F2: To Family 2 and so on.

Presented below are the results of Phase 2 - brief intervention. Figure 1 shows the occurrence of the adult's strategies in the pre- and post-intervention assessment. It was observed that a variety of strategies were employed, and the effect of the intervention varied among the participants. F1 and F3 showed higher performances on the post-intervention measure for all strategies, compared to pre-intervention. In the post-intervention measure, F2 and F4 scored higher for all strategies except for pausing. The scores for pausing remained null for F2 in both pre- and post-intervention, and identical for F4 in both measures (3). The strategies that showed the greatest increase in post-intervention compared to pre-intervention were asking questions (from 6 to 8 - F2, from 3 to 12 - F3), use of pictures (from 8 to 10 - F2; from 2 to 11 - F1, from 0 to 7 - F3), and providing explanations (from 4 to 10 - F1; from 0 to 3 - F4).

Figure 1.
Occurrence of adult behavior pre- and post-intervention. São Carlos, 2018

Figure 2 shows the number of communicative turns assessed pre- and post-intervention, with a significant increase for all parent-child interaction pairs. We counted a turn whenever one of the participants initiated communication that was directed towards the other member of the dyad. The pre-intervention measures were mostly based on a "matched turns" sequence, that is, when the adult or child initiated communication, the other responded contingently. After the intervention, the matched turns sequence was maintained, and the number of communicative turns for all dyads increased.

Figure 2.
Number of communicative turns pre- and post-intervention. São Carlos, 2018.

The number and variety of words spoken by the children post-intervention was higher for all children, when compared to the pre-intervention (Figure 3).

Figure 3.
Number and variety of words spoken by children pre- and post-intervention. São Carlos, 2018

Table 4 shows the pre- and post-intervention auditory and expressive vocabulary test scores of the children and their performance on the EVALOF. The data show a higher performance in the post-intervention for the expressive vocabulary assessment, compared to the receptive vocabulary. And, on the EVALOF, all families scored higher on the post-intervention compared to the pre-intervention.

Table 4
Pre- and post-intervention auditory and expressive vocabulary test scores of children, as well as Escala de Valoración de la Lengua Oral en contexto Familiar scores for family interaction

Family ID	RecVT		ExpVT		EVALOF
	Pre	Post	Pre	Post	Pre	Post
F1	29	30	78	80	61	72
F2	32	32	80	88	53	62
F3	27	31	61	67	49	64
F4	32	33	88	93	48	63

• Note: F1: Corresponds to Family 1; F2: To Family 2 and so on. EVALOF: Escala de Valoración de la Lengua Oral en contexto Familiar; ExpVT: Expressive Vocabulary Test; RecVT: Receptive Vocabulary Test.

Discussion

The work described and analyzed how four families, in their respective natural environments, carry out shared reading with their children, without any instruction given by any professional, as well as evaluated the effect of a brief intervention in relation to the strategies used by parents, such as the children's language.

The description of the naturalistic situation generated four categories of analysis: organization of the physical space, contact with the book, how the story is told, and the affective relationship between parents and children. Two families read in bed, and two read in the living room on the table. There seemed to be a relationship between the affective quality between parents and children and the place where the shared reading occurred. When the reading took place on the bed, there were more moments of affection and the children smiled more. When the interaction took place at the table, the children remained serious most of the time.

Interventions to increase the affective quality of the relationship between parents and children could capitalize on moments that are natural in the family's respective routines (Domeniconi & Gracia, 2018) as they seem to favor bonds, for example, by taking advantage of the moment of shared reading before bedtime. It seems that when reading at the table, with both seated, the situation is similar to a more formal and structured activity, which may not contribute to a relaxed environment. At the same time, if an intervention is proposed with other objectives related to shared reading, the table may facilitate interaction. Therefore, the decision must consider the objective of the shared reading and the proposed parent-child interaction to be evaluated.

The research, in general, provided reflections on the two-way dynamism between children-adults, which can be visualized in Figures 1 and 2. This means that the greater the number of communicative strategies used by the family during reading (Figure 1), such as pausing, asking questions about the story, using pictures from the story, expanding vocabulary, and explaining (Figure 1), contributed to the increase in communicative turns between children and adults when comparing pre- and post-intervention data (Figure 2). The impact of family mediation on the interactions proposed in the shared reading moments can be debated, especially in relation to the use of positive consequences (e.g., the recognition of the family as an audience during children's verbal episodes) provided by families, replacing coercive practices, which may have contributed to some extent in promoting the quality of family interaction, as already reported by Bonato et al. (2019).

For the four families analyzed, the adult had the greatest amount of contact with the book during reading. With the exception of F3, in which the daughter has her back to her mother, all children maintained eye contact with the book. F1 flipped through the book when their mother finished reading and F4 before their mother started. F2 just observes and points to the pictures in the book. The contact and physical familiarization with the book may create an opportunity to awaken the child's interest in reading together, stimulate him/her to ask questions based on the words and images, identify figures and name them, among other possibilities. In Benitez et al. (2016) second experiment, parents were instructed to apply activities after reading a book with their children with autism or intellectual disability in their homes. One of the steps included organizing the physical environment, the material, such as the book, and identifying words in the context of sentences. The situations analyzed in the videos sent by parents were in line with the discussion by Benitez et al. (2016) regarding the type of interaction children have with the book.

The parenting style varied in the way they performed shared reading with the child. F1 asked questions at the end of the story, asked the child to tell it, and helped the child in this process. F2 did not ask open-ended questions, but explained parts of the story and related them to elements of the family's daily life. F3 asked questions during the reading and tried to synthesize the story for her daughter, and F4 did not read the book, but told the story together with her son based on the pictures, asking questions. Despite the variability of behaviors, it is important to consider that all families used positive interactions, in the sense of providing instruction and praising their children's behavior, considered by Benitez and Domeniconi (2012) as appropriate behaviors during reading activities.

Data from the brief intervention had as dependent variables the pre- and post-intervention measurements regarding the use of teaching strategies by parents; the number of turn exchanges between the dyads; the number and variety of words used by children during reading episodes; and the children's receptive and expressive vocabulary, according to the standardized test (Capovilla et al., 2011).

Overall, improvements were observed in all measured variables when comparing the data after the intervention with those obtained previously (Figures 1, 2, 3, and Table 4). The language promotion observed with the children participating in the present study corroborates previous data on the importance of shared reading for this purpose (Colmar, 2014; Domeniconi & Gracia, 2018; Levickis et al., 2018; Milburn et al., 2014; Mol et al., 2008). Parental adherence to the intervention, evidenced by more frequent use of the target behaviors that were taught, corroborates results observed in previous studies (Domeniconi & Gracia, 2018).

The strategies used as the basis for the brief intervention have been described by the literature as effective for promoting children's language during shared reading episodes (Colmar, 2014). In addition, they are strategies that are easily adaptable to the families' daily lives and do not increase the effort already employed during reading. This is important to maintain family members' adherence to the teaching procedures proposed by professionals, considering that parents and educators are already burdened by routine tasks.

Considering the possible variety of teaching strategies that can be used in a shared reading episode and the differentiated impacts that can be observed depending on the strategies in use, we conclude that it is important to give parents and educators tools to achieve even more promising results in their interventions. As recommended by Kohm et al. (2016), the data can serve as guidelines for teacher training policies, especially in early childhood education, based on the partnership between family and school, given that empirical evidence shows the positive benefits of reading experiences among the adult-child dyad.

Data points that the increase in the number of words, as well as the variety of words used by the children, were higher in the post-test (Figure 3); however, this was not evaluated in a natural situation, i.e., it was not verified if the children started to use more words referring to the context of the book in their daily lives, in the interaction with their parents. Future studies could consider a verification phase, to be applied in the child's natural daily setting, to validate the use of the words read in the books.

Further on the children's performance, the higher scores for expressive vocabulary compared to receptive vocabulary (Table 4) replicated the study by Armonia et al. (2015), in which 80.95% of the children presented the expected performance for expressive vocabulary evaluation, while 54.2% reached the expected score for receptive vocabulary. In line with the study by Araújo et al. (2010), intensive teaching with tasks involving receptive vocabulary is recommended from the beginning of early childhood education, aiming at the development of communicative potential.

Another impact of the research refers to the arrangements necessary to ensure the interaction between family and child, in a social context of high demands of work relations. Previous literature has already evidenced worrying issues related to parents' work and the time available for bonding with family members, especially when the work occurs at night (Cia & Barham, 2008). Given this context, reflecting with the family on how to ensure quality interactions that influence the child's development was the aim of the brief intervention proposed in the study.

Conclusion

With the analysis of the videos in a naturalistic setting, it is recommended that an intervention to improve children's language could teach parents to use more language stimulation strategies during this moment, enriching the child's opportunities for speech. Also, the interpretation of the data from the brief intervention tells us that the parent-child interaction is an important promoter of child development; furthermore, that parents do not require much guidance or learning sessions to acquire important shared reading strategies (such as asking questions, explaining, and using the pictures in the book).

References

• Akamoglu, Y., & Meadan, H. (2019). Parent-Implemented Communication Strategies During Storybook Reading. Journal of Early Intervention, 41(4), 300-320. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1053815119855007
  » http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1053815119855007
• Araújo, M. V. M., Marteleto, M. R. F., & Schoen-Ferreira, T. H. (2010). Avaliação do vocabulário receptivo de crianças pré-escolares.Estudos de Psicologia (Campinas),27(2), 169-176. https://doi.org/10.1590/S0103-166X2010000200004
  » https://doi.org/10.1590/S0103-166X2010000200004
• Armonia, A. C., Mazzega, L. C., Pinto, F. C. D. A., Souza, A. C. R. F. D., Perissinoto, J., & Tamanaha, A. C. (2015). Relação entre vocabulário receptivo e expressivo em crianças com transtorno específico do desenvolvimento da fala e da linguagem.Revista CEFAC,17(3), 759-765. https://doi.org/10.1590/1982-021620156214
  » https://doi.org/10.1590/1982-021620156214
• Balog, L. C., Domeniconi, C., Benitez, P., & Gràcia, M. (2022). Ensino da linguagem oral no contexto familiar: uma ferramenta de avaliação UFSCar/CPOI.
• Batista Rocha, J. C., & Mota, M. M. P. E. (2022). Does shared reading between parents and children affect the development of emerging literacy?.Trends in Psychology, 31, 1-11. https://doi.org/10.1007/s43076-021-00070-6
  » https://doi.org/10.1007/s43076-021-00070-6
• Benitez, P., & Domeniconi, C. (2012). Verbalizações de familiares durante aprendizagem de leitura e escrita por deficientes intelectuais. Estudos de Psicologia (Campinas), 29(4), 553-562. https://doi.org/10.1590/S0103-166X2012000400010
  » https://doi.org/10.1590/S0103-166X2012000400010
• Benitez, P., Piqué, M. C., & Domeniconi, C. (2016). Menores con autismo y discapacidad intelectual que aprenden a leer y escribir. Apuntes de Psicologia, 34(1), 37-46.
• Blewitt, P., & Langan, R. (2016). Learning words during shared book reading: The role of extratextual talk designed to increase child engagement. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 150, 404-410. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jecp.2016.06.009
  » http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jecp.2016.06.009
• Bonato, A. C., Minetto, M. D. F., & Weber, L. N. (2019) Adaptação do programa de qualidade na interação familiar para famílias com filhos com transtorno do espectro autista. International Journal of Developmental and Educational Psychology, 2(1), 399-410. https://doi.org/10.17060/ijodaep.2019.n1.v2.1473
  » https://doi.org/10.17060/ijodaep.2019.n1.v2.1473
• Capovilla F. C., Negrão V. B., & Damázio M. (2011). Teste de Vocabulário Auditivo e Teste de Vocabulário Receptivo: validados e normatizados para o desenvolvimento da compreensão da fala dos 18 meses aos 6 anos de idade Memnon.
• Cia, F., & Barham, E. J. (2008). Trabalho noturno e o novo papel paterno: uma interface difícil. Estudos de Psicologia (Campinas), 25, 211-221. https://doi.org/10.1590/S0103-166X2008000200006
  » https://doi.org/10.1590/S0103-166X2008000200006
• Colmar, S. H. (2014). A parent based book-reading intervention for disadvantaged children with language difficulties. Child Language Teaching and Therapy, 30(1), 79-90.
• Domeniconi, C., & Gracia, M. (2018). Efectos de una intervención siguiendo el modelo enfocado en la familia para promover avances en el desarrollo del lenguaje de los niños, Revista de Investigación en Logopedia, 8(2), 165-181. http://dx.doi.org/10.5209/RLOG.58734
  » http://dx.doi.org/10.5209/RLOG.58734
• Domeniconi, C., Gràcia, M., Benitez, P., & Vessoni, J. (2017). Adaptação da Escala de Avaliação do Ensino de Linguagem Oral em Contexto Escolar (EVALOE) para seu uso em Contexto Familiar (EVALOF). Revista de Psicologia da Criança e do Adolescente, 8(1), 65-80.
• Dowdall, N., Melendez‐Torres, G. J., Murray, L., Gardner, F., Hartford, L., & Cooper, P. J. (2020). Shared picture book reading interventions for child language development: A systematic review and meta‐analysis. Child Development, 91(2), 383-399. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/cdev.13225
  » http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/cdev.13225
• Faggian, A. (2021). Os efeitos da leitura dialógica sobre a aquisição de habilidades pré-matemáticas em pré-escolares [Unpublished master’s thesis]. Universidade Federal de São Carlos.
• Fletcher, K. L., & Reese, E. (2005). Picture book reading with young children: A conceptual framework. Developmental Review, 25(1), 64-103. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.dr.2004.08.009
  » http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.dr.2004.08.009
• Ganotice, F. A., Jr. Downing, K., Mak, T., Chan, B., & Lee, W. Y. (2016). Enhancing parent-child relationship through dialogic reading. Educational Studies, 43(1), 51-66. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/03055698.2016.1238340
  » http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/03055698.2016.1238340
• Heidlage, J. K., Cunningham, J. E., Kaiser, A. P., Trivette, C. M., Barton, E. E., Frey, J. R., & Roberts, M. Y. (2020). The effects of parent-implemented language interventions on child linguistic outcomes: A meta-analysis. Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 50, 6-23. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecresq.2018.12.006
  » https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecresq.2018.12.006
• Jimenez, M. E., Mendelsohn, A. L., Lin, Y., Shelton, P., & Reichman, N. (2019). Early shared reading is associated with less harsh parenting. Journal of Developmental & Behavioral Pediatrics, 40(7), 530-537. http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/DBP.0000000000000687
  » http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/DBP.0000000000000687
• Kazdin, A. E. (2011). Single-case research designs: Methods for clinical and applied settings Oxford University Press.
• Kohm, K. E., Holmes, R. M., Romeo, L., & Koolidge, L. (2016). The connection between shared storybook readings, children’s imagination, social interactions, affect, prosocial behavior, and social play. International Journal of Play, 5(2), 128-140.http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/21594937.2016.1203895
  » http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/21594937.2016.1203895
• Kotaman, H. (2020). Impacts of dialogical storybook reading on young children’s reading attitudes and vocabulary development. Reading Improvement, 57(1), 40-45.
• Levickis, P., Reilly, S., Girolametto, L., Ukoumunne, O. C., & Wake, M. (2018). Associations between maternal responsive linguistic input and child language performance at age 4 in a community‐based sample of slow‐to‐talk toddlers. Child: Care, Health and Development, 44(5), 776-783. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/cch.12600
  » http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/cch.12600
• Marjanovič-Umek, L., Hacin, K., & Fekonja, U. (2019). The quality of mother-child shared reading: Its relations to child’s storytelling and home literacy environment. Early Child Development and Care, 189(7), 1135-1146. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/03004430.2017.1369975
  » http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/03004430.2017.1369975
• Menotti, A. R. S., Domeniconi, C., & Benitez, P. (2019). Atividades aplicadas pelos pais para ensinar leitura para filhos com autismo.Psicologia Escolar e Educacional, 23, e185073. https://doi.org/10.1590/2175-35392019015073
  » https://doi.org/10.1590/2175-35392019015073
• Milburn, T. F., Girolametto, L., Weitzman, E., & Greenberg, J. (2014). Enhancing preschool educator`s ability to facilitate conversations during shared book reading. Journal of Early Childhood Literacy, 14(1), 105-140. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1468798413478261
  » http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1468798413478261
• Millan, A. E., & Postalli, L. M. M. (2019). Ensino de habilidades rudimentares de leitura para alunos com autismo.Revista Brasileira de Educação Especial , 25, 133-154. https://doi.org/10.1590/S1413-65382519000100009
  » https://doi.org/10.1590/S1413-65382519000100009
• Mol, S. E., Bus, A. G., Jong, M. T., & Smeets, D. J. (2008). Added value of dialogic parent-child book readings: A meta-analysis. Early Education and Development, 19(1), 7-26. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/10409280701838603
  » http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/10409280701838603
• Neuman, S. B., & Dickinson, D. K. (2003). Handbook of early literacy research Guilford Press.
• Neves, A. J., Almeida-Verdu, A. C. M., Nascimento Silva, L. T., & Moret, A. L. M. (2019). Ensino baseado em equivalência e produção de sentenças em crianças com implante coclear.Revista Brasileira de Análise do Comportamento,15(1). http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0265659013507296
  » http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0265659013507296
• Shahaeian, A., Wang, C., Tucker-Drob, E., Geiger, V., Bus, A. G., & Harrison, L. J. (2018). Early shared reading, socioeconomic status, and children’s cognitive and school competencies: Six years of longitudinal evidence. Scientific Studies of Reading, 22(6), 485-502. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/10888438.2018.1482901
  » http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/10888438.2018.1482901
• Silva, A. J. M., Keuffer, S. I. C., Oliveira, J. S. C. D., & Barros, R. D. S. (2018). Aquisição de repertório intraverbal via instrução baseada em equivalência em crianças com TEA.Trends in Psychology,26, 1155-1171.

• Support:

  Fundação de Amparo à Pesquisa do Estado de São Paulo (Fapesp) (Process nº2018/23221-6).

Edited by

Editor:

Raquel Souza Lobo Guzzo

Publication Dates

• Publication in this collection
  22 Apr 2024
• Date of issue
  2024

History

• Received
  19 Feb 2021
• Reviewed
  21 Nov 2022
• Accepted
  10 May 2023