Language and reading impairments are associated with increased prevalence of non-right-handedness

Handedness has been studied for association with language-related disorders because of its link with language hemispheric dominance. No clear pattern has emerged, possibly because of small samples, publication bias, and heterogeneous criteria across studies. Non-right-handedness (NRH) frequency was assessed in N = 2503 cases with reading and/or language impairment and N = 4316 sex-matched controls identified from 10 distinct cohorts (age range 6–19 years old; European ethnicity) using a priori set criteria. A meta-analysis (N_cases = 1994) showed elevated NRH % in individuals with language/reading impairment compared with controls (OR = 1.21, CI = 1.06–1.39, p = .01). The association between reading/language impairments and NRH could result from shared pathways underlying brain lateralization, handedness, and cognitive functions.     

The relation between individual interest and knowledge acquisition

The objective of this study was to examine how individual interest and knowledge acquisition are causally related. Three hypotheses were tested using a cross‐lagged panel analysis (N = 186) and two quasi‐experimental studies (N = 68 and N = 108) involving students from schools in Singapore. The first hypothesis is the broadly shared standard assumption on the relation between individual interest and knowledge: the more an individual is interested in a topic, the more (s)he is willing to engage in learning. An alternative hypothesis assumes that individual interest is not the cause but the consequence of the process of learning: individual interest as an affective by‐product of learning. Finally, a third possibility is that interest and knowledge influence each other reciprocally. The results supported the affective‐by‐product hypothesis. Our findings seem at variance with commonly held conceptions that being interested guides knowledge attainment. The implications of these findings for interest research are discussed.     

The Project Ownership Survey: Measuring Differences in Scientific Inquiry Experiences

A growing body of research documents the positive outcomes of research experiences for undergraduates, including increased persistence in science. Study of undergraduate lab learning experiences has demonstrated that the design of the experience influences the extent to which students report ownership of the project and that project ownership is one of the psychosocial factors involved in student retention in the sciences. To date, methods for measuring project ownership have not been suitable for the collection of larger data sets. The current study aims to rectify this by developing, presenting, and evaluating a new instrument for measuring project ownership. Eighteen scaled items were generated based on prior research and theory related to project ownership and combined with 30 items shown to measure respondents’ emotions about an experience, resulting in the Project Ownership survey (POS). The POS was analyzed to determine its dimensionality, reliability, and validity. The POS had a coefficient alpha of 0.92 and thus has high internal consistency. Known-groups validity was analyzed through the ability of the instrument to differentiate between students who studied in traditional versus research-based laboratory courses. The POS scales as differentiated between the groups and findings paralleled previous results in relation to the characteristics of project ownership.     

Differential reactions to assertive and communicative acts of toddler boys and girls

34 children were observed in infant play groups. 2 sets of infant behaviors were coded: assertive acts and attempts to communicate with adults. No sex differences were observed at 13 to 14 months in any of these behaviors. However, adults attended to girls' assertive behaviors far less of the time than to boys' assertive behaviors. They attended more to girls' less intense communication attempts and to boys' more intense attempts. When 29 of the same children were observed in toddler play groups no more than 11 months later, there were sex differences in behavior. Boys were more assertive; girls talked to teachers more. Teachers no longer differentiated their responses to boys and girls. Peers reacted more to boys' assertive behavior than to girls.' We hypothesized that caregivers may use stereotypes to guide their reactions to infants because infant behavior is ambiguous. For the toddlers, behavior had become more defined, and caregivers reacted to the behaviors. By using the sex stereotype to guide their reactions to younger children, the caregivers may have perpetuated the stereotype.     

A Chat Room—Educational Psychologists but No Curriculum Methodologists?

Although educational psychologists once were tied in with teachers in solving instructional problems, the progression of the science of psychology has led them away from the practical aspects of teaching. Instead, educational psychologists find themselves talking about theories—in their own language—to each other, and not to their colleagues in the curriculum areas. To this end they are not a continuing source of productive information for solving practical problems in classroom practice. Suggestions are made for improving communication between educational psychologists and on-line educators.