Introduction

A young child’s complex narratives skills are predictive of later academic achievement and cognitive gains (Fivush et al. 2006), and early childhood educators play a key role in fostering early narrative skills. Nevertheless, the research informing on optimal adult–child interactions has mostly relied on observations from Western European or European-American caregivers and their young children (e.g. Petersen and McCabe 1994; Fisher and Wood 2012). Other cultural groups often have rich traditions of supporting language development through interactions, yet their narrative styles have been typically ignored by researchers and educators.

Home-based interaction research has been a consistent resource for the development of early childhood classroom recommendations (Dickinson and Tabors 2002); this study attempts to explore the potential effect of collectivist styles of narrative supports in the home environment, in order to inform educational practices in early education settings. Given the rise of diverse families in Western education systems around the world, it is essential that educators understand culturally-responsive ways of fostering expressive language skills in young children of collectivist backgrounds.

Parent–Child Narratives About Past Events

A key universal task in early childhood is the development of expressive language and narrative skills; these skills are essential for a child’s cognitive development, abstract thinking, and emotional regulation (Vygotsky 1980; National Research Council 2015). High quality interactions between children and their caregivers have been shown to increase a child’s vocabulary, literacy skills such as print awareness and story comprehension, and a child’s memorization abilities (Fivush et al. 2006). This is especially true when caregivers and children engage in abstract discussions that are removed from the “here and now,” such as discussions about past events (Rowe 2012).

Caregivers play a key role in children’s development of expressive language and adults of all cultures support language development in children by “scaffolding” children’s narratives (Vygotsky 1980; National Research Council 2015). Yet this process is deeply embedded in the cultural context of the family, and adult–child interactions are often guided by cultural beliefs, goals, intentions, and motives (Jaramillo et al. 2017).

Cultural Orientation

Parental cultural goals and beliefs are powerful organizers of caregiving intentions and behaviors (Halgunseth et al. 2006). A vast body of research has investigated key differences among cultural orientation and found that the most prominent factor that distinguishes among cultures is the meaning of the relationship between the individual and the social group (Nisbett 2003; Oyserman et al. 2002). Two dimensions of social orientation have been consistently identified in the literature: individualism and collectivism. Individualistic cultures view individuals as independent agents and stress the value of autonomy, independence, the achievement of personal goals, and self-expression (Arieli and Sagiv 2018). In contrast, collectivist cultures view the individual as an integral part of a group and stress the value of interdependence, strong interpersonal relationships, respect, compromise, and the achievement of group goals.

Parents in individualistic cultures have been shown to stress independence, reasoning, negotiation skills, and self-assertion (Plotka and Busch-Rossnagel 2017). In contrast, parents in collectivist cultures have been shown to stress the importance of interconnectedness, strong family ties, and loyalty to the family. Similarly, collectivist-oriented parents strive to instill the maintenance of harmonious interpersonal relationships among the family (e.g. Fracasso and Busch-Rossnagel 1992; Varela et al. 2004). These differences among parental cultural orientations shape the quality of caregiver–child language interactions and the strategies caregivers use when engaging in narratives with young children.

Individualistic Approach to Adult–Child Narratives: The Elaborative Style

Caregivers in individualistic cultures often scaffold children’s narrative skills using an elaborative style. The elaborative style is characterized by the adult assuming the role of the guide in structuring the child’s narrative, with the child typically assuming the role of information provider. Caregivers often structure the narrative with the use of numerous questions and many requests for information. This style of scaffolding has been found to be highly effective at fostering complex narrative skills in young children, including more descriptive narratives and higher vocabulary skills (Reese and Newcombe 2007).

The elaborative style is consistent with the European-American value of individualism and the achievement of personal goals. European-American parents see narratives with young children as educational and focus on the achievement of a high-quality narrative to promote expressive language and thinking. The caregivers see the narrative as beneficial to the child’s educational goals, and they view their own role as guides in this process.

An extensive body of research has studied the types of elaborative adult prompts that are most effective at fostering young children’s narrative skills. Research has consistently found that when comparing different elaborative prompts, the use of open-ended “why” and “how” questions is the most effective way of eliciting children’s conversations about past events (Reese et al. 2010). Teacher training has been informed by observing elaborative styles of parent–child interactions (e.g. Reese et al. 2006).

Collectivist Approach to Narrative Scaffolding: The Participatory Style

Observations of caregiver–child interactions in collectivist cultures have shown a very different pattern of interactions when adults scaffold young children’s narratives. Many caregivers in collectivist cultures have been found to engage in a participatory style of conversation. In the participatory styles, both children and adults assume equal roles in constructing and structuring the conversations and are both full participants in the narrative. The adult encourages the child to take ownership of the narrative using non-directive comments, and avoids structuring the narrative (Melzi et al. 2011). This style is characterized by a balance between requests and the provision of information between the caregiver and the child, as both parties work together to create a story and take an equally active role in the narration. For example, Schieffelin and Eisenberg (1984) observed that Latino mothers are likely to encourage their children to take ownership of the narrative. Melzi (2000) found that Central-American mothers use many non-directive and open-ended prompts to engage their children in narrative and storytelling. Furthermore, Eisenberg (1985) found that Mexican-American mothers refrain from structuring children narratives; instead, they allow for the narrative to take its natural course without guiding or attempting to shift the narrative into a particular outcome.

Parents in collectivist cultures value interconnectedness and close social bonds (Busch-Rossnagel 2006). Caregivers view the narrative as an opportunity to develop interpersonal relationships and strengthen emotional bonds; they view the goal of the narrative as social and recreational. Because adults view storytelling and narratives as beneficial for both children and adults, they focus on both children and adults becoming full participants in the narrative and sharing the storytelling process.

Caregiver Prompts to Support Narratives

Caregivers often scaffold the narrative with prompts that align with their cultural values. The prompts used in individualistic families in order to elicit elaboration have been heavily studied and typically consist of questions and requests for information (Yu et al. 2017).

The specific prompts used in collectivistic families in order to elicit participation, however, have not been studied extensively. One exception is a study conducted by Plotka and Wang (2016), who explored the naturalistic conversations of Latino families. In their pilot study, they identified culturally specific collectivist-oriented prompts adults used to foster children’s narratives and to elicit participation. These prompts invited children to develop a narrative together with the adults. Invitations by the adult included statements such as “Remember when we went to the zoo…” or “When I was little…” These messages give the child information about the adult’s intention to fully participate in the conversation and to elicit a narrative that is co-constructed by the adult as well as the child. Plotka and Wang (2016, 2018) found that when Latino caregivers relied heavily on participatory prompts, they were more effective at fostering complex narrative skills in young Latino children than when they used elaborative prompts (Plotka and Wang 2016, 2018). Nevertheless, Plotka and Wang (2016, 2018) based their conclusions on a small sample consisting of only families from Latino backgrounds. A study that includes a larger sample, with other collectivist groups, is likely to yield recommendations for research and practice.

Study Aim and Gap in the Literature

The aim of the study was to explore the narrative styles of collectivistic families and the strategies used by caregivers in order to engage young children in narratives.

There are several gaps in the literature, which informed the aims of the present study. First, previous literature has placed a premium on the use of elaborative prompts to support children’s narratives, ignoring the potential effects of participatory prompts. Using participatory prompts has been shown to be effective at promoting narrative skills in Latino home settings (Plotka and Wang 2016). Nevertheless, this study was conducted with a small sample and a larger sample would yield more informative results. Second, the effects of participatory prompts have only been studied in the context of Latino families. Little is known about whether participatory styles of conversation are common among other collectivist cultures. These gaps in the literature were explored by way of this research.

Through this study, the researchers attempted to address whether culturally-specific strategies, such as whether or not participatory prompts were effective at supporting young children narratives, by answering the following questions:

  1. 1.

    Do caregivers from collectivist cultures use participatory prompts when scaffolding their narratives with young children? If so, how often?

  2. 2.

    Are participatory prompts an effective way of promoting complex narrative skills in young children?

  3. 3.

    Are narratives guided by participatory prompts more complex than narratives that are not guided by such prompts?

Methods

Participants and Procedure

The sample consisted of forty (N = 40; 20 girls and 20 boys) young children ages 3–9 (Mean age = 6.2, S.D. = 1.8). The study consisted of naturalistic observations of young children’s narratives with their caregivers. Caregivers were instructed to engage children in conversation as usual. Each family was visited at home and all observations were video-recorded and translated verbatim. All children resided in a major United States metropolis. All children were bilingual and spoke a language other than English in the home. All participants have signed consent forms, and the study was approved by the institutional review board of the study authors. Caregivers signed consent forms in their homes. Consent forms were offered in English and Spanish. Children assented verbally to being video-recorded. It was explained to the children that they were helping others understand how multilingual children develop language.

Because past research highlights the role of participatory prompts in Latino families, 50% of the sample (N = 20) were drawn from Latino children for whom participatory styles have shown to be more common and effective. In addition, since the literature has not previously studied the role of participatory styles in caregivers of other collectivist cultures, the decision was made to include 50% of the sample (N = 20) of another collectivistic group. Children from Orthodox Yiddish-speaking families in the U.S. were recruited for the study. The decision to include Yiddish-speaking families was made because parent–child interactions had previously been studied in several collectivist cultures such as Chinese (Chuang and Su 2009), West Indian (Griffith and Grolnick 2013), Turkish (Yaman et al. 2010), etc.; very little research, however, exists in the realm of parent–child interactions in Yiddish-speaking families. In addition, families of both cultures in the sample resided in close proximity, within the same school districts, and were grouped within several demographic variables such as socio-economic status, urban residence status, and home language use. Yiddish-speaking Orthodox families have been consistently identified as having a collectivist cultural orientation (Cohen 2007; Haj-Yahia 1995; Lavee and Katz 2003; Pines and Zaidman 2003).

Measures

This study builds on the findings of previous exploratory studies investigating participatory styles and part of the measures have been described in those studies (Plotka and Wang 2016, 2018).

Participatory Styles of Narrative Support

Participatory styles of narrative support were measured by the Caregiver Prompt Styles Coding Scheme (CPS) developed by Plotka and Wang (2016). Plotka and Wang (2016) analyzed the naturalistic conversations of collectivist families and identified three categories of participatory prompts:

  1. 1.

    Prompts inviting the discussion about shared experiences such as: “Remember when we…”

  2. 2.

    Discussion of adult’s own past experiences such as: “When I was little we used to…”

  3. 3.

    Expressions of emotion and excitement such as: “This is incredible!” and “You are so lucky!” 
This included use of first person remarks such as “I can’t believe what you are telling me!” or “I am so proud.”

These three categories were observed, and they each highlight a caregiver who is an active participant; one fully vested in the narrative and not just a guide. In Appendix 1, three examples are presented. Example 1 illustrates a father guiding the conversation by encouraging the discussion of shared experiences. Although some questions are used, the discussions are not guided by the questions, but rather by explanations about shared experiences. In example 2, a mother guides the conversation through the discussion of her own experiences throughout the day. Finally, example 3 provides a contrast, in which the caregiver uses a typically elaborative style of conversation by guiding the narrative through open-ended and closed-ended question.

Children’s Narrative Complexity

Narrative complexity was measured in three ways: at the micro level, the macro level, and through the child’s engagement in the narrative.

Micro Level Measure

Children’s vocabulary was assessed through the number of different words (NDW) in a conversation. NDW is the total count of unique, uninflected lexemes used in each complete conversation. NDW has been shown to be a valid indicator of a child’s vocabulary and is widely used in narrative research (Miller et al. 2006). In order to assess the vocabulary levels in a conversation as a whole, children’s NDW, adult NDW, and total NDW in each conversation were measured.

Macro Level Measure

Children’s macro level narrative complexity was measured by the number of independent idea units (IIU) a child produced within each episode. Independent idea units are used in traditional linguistic research to assess an individual’s macro level of narrative complexity. Independent idea units are a universal property of spoken language and are described as expressions with a single idea and one set of syntactic structure (Chafe 1980). In order to assess the macro level complexity in the conversation as a whole, children’s independent idea units, adults’ independent idea units, and the total number of independent idea units in each conversation were measured.

Children’s Engagement in the Narrative

Children’s engagement in the narrative was measured in two ways. First, the number of children’s initiations of topics for conversation within each narrative was measured. When adults are successful at promoting narratives, children are motivated to initiate conversations about similar experiences and discuss a topic further without the need for an adult to often initiate conversation (Plotka and Wang 2016).

Second, the number of turns that children and adults took in the course of each conversation were measured. The number of turns correlates with the children’s engagement in the narrative. Episodes with more turns have children who are dwelling on the same topic for a longer period of time. Similarly, as children take more turns in conversations around the same topic, the conversation gets more complex because children and adults are delving on the same idea for longer. This measure has been used by narrative research in preschool classrooms in the past (e.g. Dickinson and Tabors 2002).

Coder Reliability

Reliability was conducted for 25% of the sample. Cohen’s Kappa was used as a measure of agreement between the coders for adult prompt categories. Intraclass correlations Alpha Coefficients were computed to compare the types of adult prompts, independent idea units, initiations, and number of turns in conversation. The reliability values were as follows; type of prompts: Kappa = .83, p < .0001; number of independent idea units (IIU) = .90, p < .0001; number of child initiations = .89, p < .0001; number of turns = 1.00, p < .0001. NDW were computed with special software.

Unit of Analysis

In order to answer our research questions, an interactive episode was used as a basic measuring unit. An interactive episode is defined as an interaction between adults and children about a theme, an event, or a topic (Wang et al. 2012). The end of an episode is marked when participants stop being interested in the topic and the conversation comes to a natural end. Episodes have been widely used as a unit of analysis by researchers studying family interactions (e.g., Wang et al. 2005). Only episodes containing narratives about past events were coded for this study. Because conversations were only included in the study if they centered on past events, some children-caregiver dyads produced more conversations than others. Similarly, some dyads were more engaged in conversations, discussing the same topic for longer, while others were observed to carry many unrelated conversations. These differences were accounted for by the coding and measures that address children’s engagement and conversation length as markers of narrative complexity.

Results

Preliminary Analysis

Gender Differences and Group Differences

Gender differences were tested using General Linear Models (GLM) multivariate analysis of variance. The results show that there were no significant multivariate gender differences in children narrative complexity as the Wilk’s λ = .81, F(9,67) = 1.42, p = .19. Since the multivariate test was not significant, no follow-up univariate tests were performed. Differences in narrative complexity among children from both cultures were tested using GLM. The results show that the two cultural groups were not significantly different in measures of narrative complexity as Wilk’s λ = .92, F(2,74) = 2.89, p = .07. The follow-up univariate comparisons were not significant.

Main Analysis

First Research Question

The first research questions asked how common the use of participatory prompts was among caregivers from collectivist cultures. The results showed that, on average, caregivers used participatory prompts 30% of the time. Among the most common participatory prompts were adults’ discussions of their own experiences (38% of the time), followed by discussions of shared experiences (32% of the time), and expression of emotions or excitement (30% of the time).

This study also explored whether caregivers in both cultures differed in their approaches when supporting the narratives of young children. To answer this question, GLM multivariate analysis of variance was used. The results showed no significant differences in narrative supports among groups [Wilk’s λ = .93, F(2,72) = .79, p = .07], and no univariate differences were found in the use of participatory prompts [F (2,72) = .38, p = .53].

Second Research Question

The second research question asked whether participatory prompts were effective ways of supporting narrative skills in young children. This was answered with a regression analysis for each one of the outcome variables testing narrative complexity and narrative engagement with the use of participatory prompts as the predictor variable.

The results are presented in Table 1.

Table 1 Regressions testing the effects of the use of participatory prompts on children’s narrative complexity and engagement
Full size table

Third Research Question

The third research question asked if narratives guided by participatory prompts were more complex than narratives not guided by participatory prompts. To test this question, conversations were separated into participatory conversations and non-participatory conversations. Participatory conversations were those that included at least one or more participatory prompts. The reason for this is because one participatory prompt often sets the stage for a participatory tone in the conversations, and with the use of one of more prompts (such as “Remember when you and I…”) children understand that the conversations are inviting participation. GLM was used to determine whether participatory conversations were more complex than non-participatory conversations. The results showed that participatory conversations were significantly more complex than non-participatory conversations as Wilk’s λ = .704, F (9, 67) = 3.31, p = .003. The follow up univariate comparisons (presented in Table 2) showed that participatory conversations included significantly higher levels of child, adult, and total independent idea units. The follow-up univariate comparisons showed that participatory conversations included significantly higher levels of adult words, and the total number of different words, as well as a trend towards significantly higher levels of the child’s number of different words. Participatory conversations included more turns in the conversation and marginally significantly higher levels of child initiations of topics in conversations.

Table 2 Comparing narrative complexity in participatory and non-participatory conversations
Full size table

Discussion

This study explored the role of collectivist approaches to narrative supports in children’s development with the goal of informing educational practices. Specifically, this study explored adult use of participatory prompts when scaffolding children narratives about past events. The results support some of the previous findings in the field.

First, the results of the study confirm that adults in collectivist cultures rely extensively on a participatory style of conversations. Previous research (Melzi 2000; Melzi et al. 2011; Schieffelin and Eisenberg 1984) proposed the idea of a participatory style of conversation; this study identified and measured the instances in which adults engage children in conversations using such a style. The present study found that caregivers use participatory prompts 30% of the time. This suggests that when looking at adult–child interactions from an individualist lens, researchers and educators might miss a large percentage of adult–child supportive interactions—concluding that adults from collectivist backgrounds do not support children narrative’s skills as often as they do.

Second, the results support previous assertions that participator prompts are an effective way of supporting young children’s narrative skills. Plotka and Wang (2016, 2018) found that participatory prompts were effective at supporting narrative skills in young Latino children. The current study supported these assertions with a larger sample and also found that participatory styles are effective at supporting narrative skills in children of other cultural and linguistic backgrounds, in addition to children in Latino families. Lastly, the current study found that, for children from collectivist backgrounds, participatory conversations are more complex than non-participatory conversations.

Limitations

This study had several limitations and implications for further research. First, children’s ages were varied, and further research can focus on a limited age range. Second, the study included families from two collectivist backgrounds. In the future, research can focus on other collectivist cultures. Furthermore, further research is necessary to assess the effects of participatory styles of conversations in families of individualistic backgrounds and to compare the effectiveness of such practices among individualistic families. Lastly, family observations have informed educational practices in the past; future research should assess the effect of adopting participatory styles in educational settings.

Implications for Early Childhood Education

The results of the study have implications for early childhood educators. Early childhood educators play a key role in fostering decontextualized narrative skills, and interactions between children and preschool teachers have been shown to influence early language and academic skills (Dickinson and Porche 2011). Teachers spend a substantial amount of time scaffolding children’s narratives about concepts discussed in the classroom, as well as children’s previous knowledge and experiences.

In the past, recommendations were developed based on effective observations between parents and children in individualistic families (Petersen and McCabe 1994). Given the changes in Western early childhood classroom composition, recommendations for policy and practice based on observations of parent–child interactions of diverse cultural backgrounds can prove highly effective.

Teachers can implement participatory styles of narrative supports by becoming active participants in children’s narratives. One way of doing this is by eliciting children’s narratives about events that occur in the classroom. These narratives can be documented, transcribed, and illustrated by children and teachers. Prompts such as “Remember when we visited the bakery?” or “Remember when we took a walk to the park?” can prompt complex narratives in young children. Teachers can also become active participants by sharing their own experiences related to the topics discussed in class. For example, teachers can prompt participatory conversations by stating “I really enjoyed planting with you…” or “The first time I used finger paints I was a little worried because…” Adult discussions of their own past experiences tend to inspire complex narratives in young children. Lastly, the results of the study show that teachers can become active participants in narratives by scaffolding children’s expressive language through remarks and comments. Comments that express excitement, emotions, or enthusiasm tend to encourage children to share their thoughts. For example, teachers can guide narratives by saying things like “That is incredible!” or “I can’t believe this!” or “What an interesting observation!”

In conclusion, the results of this study can help inform policy discourse about multiculturalism in early childhood education. The National Association for the Education of Young Children (2008) has issued a position statement with strategies for educators on responding to linguistic and cultural diversity. The findings in this study build on these recommendations by encouraging educators to honor families’ cultural values, and by proposing the use culturally-responsive styles of interactions in their daily routines when supporting literacy or delivering curriculum. The results can also help teachers move away from a celebratory approach to multiculturalism in the classroom, often implemented by celebrating different festivals, eating exotic food, and wearing traditional clothing (Alenuma-Nimoh 2016). By highlighting an application of cultural-responsiveness that focuses on shaping interactions and the prompts used in the classrooms teachers align with children’s cultural backgrounds.