Parenting Journal · Volume 1 · Issue 1 · Licensed source edition
Embedding Scientific Explanations Into Storybooks Impacts Children’s Scientific Discourse and Learning
Originally published 2020-06-10 · Frontiers in Psychology
Frontiers Media SA · DOI 10.3389/fpsyg.2020.01016 ↗
Editorial reading guide · Collaboration
How can shared reading become a conversation about how something works?
Shared storybook reading becomes a setting for joint scientific explanation and hands-on learning. The study focuses on conversation between parent and child rather than adult instruction alone.
Who was studied?
60 parent–child dyads in museum and laboratory settings.
Age / stage: 4–5 years
Read with three questions
- How did the two storybook versions differ?
- What happened during the shared circuit-building task?
- How did parent–child mechanistic conversation relate to children’s learning outcomes?
Keep the limits in view
This small, short-term experiment used a particular storybook and science task in a relatively educated sample. It does not establish long-term science achievement or effects in every family setting.
The text below is the original article’s licensed repository edition. Its wording is not rewritten. Use the Paper Agent beside the text to locate evidence; open the source for figures, tables and complete context.
Opening the verified paper and agent…
Checking the article identity, license record, and saved source text.
Open the repository recordAttribution & reuse
Follow the original.
Original authorship, publication date, journal and DOI are preserved. This issue’s TRICK placement and reading questions are editorial additions, not claims made by the original authors.
Kathryn A Leech; Amanda S Haber; Youmna Jalkh; Kathleen H Corriveau (2020). Embedding Scientific Explanations Into Storybooks Impacts Children’s Scientific Discourse and Learning Frontiers in Psychology. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2020.01016
Permissions checked against the saved article notice; repository publication notices screened 2026-11-04. This is not a new peer-review decision. The source authors and publishers are not represented as endorsing this issue.