Preschool Children Science Mental Representations: The Sound in Space
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
The research addresses a topic of high interest, the study is wellfounded, the methodology is rigorous and the results are clear. But the discussion must be improved. It only compares the results with
references to works by Piaget and the author himself. It is essential
that a discussion makes reference to recent studies on a similar topic
that are not only those of the author of the work.
Author Response
Thank you very much to Reviewer 1 for the important point he made to us regarding Discussion (“It only compares the results with references to works by Piaget and the author himself. It is essential that a discussion makes reference to recent studies on a similar topic that are not only those of the author of the work”).
In the new version of the Discussion, in the 2nd, 3rd, and 4th paragraphs, we have highlighted the findings of the other studies presented in section 2.2 and related them to the findings of our own research. These are the phrases that are highlighted in yellow.
Reviewer 2 Report
The study reported appears mature and delivers an interesting contribution to cognitive sound processing in young children. There are the following major points which should consider in a revised manuscript version:
- Sound, if not used as abstract sound / tone, is inherently bound to a semantic information. In other words, object location is combined with object identity (semantic part), and cognitive capacity is not only required for processing these two information separately, but also for object location binding (binding semantic information to the location). Studies in spatial cognition research exist that show advantages if information is communicated audiovisually, which according to Lammert-Siepmann and colleagues (https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0186065) increases the accuracy of bound spatial information. Information and references on object location memory performance should be included in the introduction, also going back to Postma et al. (https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1080/713755605)
- When it comes to the research question in the last paragraph of the second chapter, could you be a bit more precisely in terms of your study hypotheses? You have research questions which are related to the chain of argumentation in the introduction, no doubt. However, what direction / hypothesis would you expect from the cited literature? Operating with hypotheses would increase the quality and scientific soundness of the paper a bit more.
- The discussion section lacks a detailed discussion with references to literature that backs up or contradicts the identified results. Could you extend the paragraphs and establish this connection?
Author Response
We are very grateful to reviewer 2 for his/her very important comments. We have tried to respond to all the comments. Below we present all the additions, changes, and corrections we have made. Yellow highlighted phrases are included in the text of the revised paper.
Comment: Sound, if not used as abstract sound/tone, is inherently bound to a semantic information. In other words, object location is combined with object identity (semantic part), and cognitive capacity is not only required for processing these two information separately, but also for object location binding (binding semantic information to the location). Studies in spatial cognition research exist that show advantages if information is communicated audiovisually, which according to Lammert-Siepmann and colleagues (https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0186065) increases the accuracy of bound spatial information. Information and references on object location memory performance should be included in the introduction, also going back to Postma et al. (https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1080/713755605)
Different disciplines investigate sound through different approaches and methodologies. In experimental psychology, research has shown that audio information can support visual information by creating a multimodal combined perception [7]. Auditory modalities improve the transfer of spatial information and spatial orientation performance and have a positive impact on the memory of spatial objects in a visual environment [8]. For example, in cartography the auditory information of a property of an object in a map help memory in determining the location of the object. The integrated audiovisual information for a semantic property of a spatial object creates a binding between the object-identity and the object-location, which has an effect in memory process [9]. Although research in experimental psychology explores cognitive processes related to the connections between sound information and spatial entities as referring to the environment, the present study adopts the science education approach. According to physics, sound is an oscillation of molecules of an elastic medium (e.g. air) which, however, do not move from the source to the receiver. The source mechanically stimulates its neighboring molecules, which in turn stimulate those next to them, etc., resulting in a wave which finally stimulates the receiver’s sensory organ. Physics deals with the construction of scientific / conceptual models that explore and describe this mechanism, while medicine, biology and neuroscience deal with the way the above mentioned mechanical stimulus which reaches the receiver in the form of a wave is encoded in terms of biological, cognitive processes etc. Science education, among other things, deals with the possibility of a conceptual approach to these scientific models by students. From this perspective, the current study confines its interest in the way students think about sound.
[7] Van der Burg E.; Talsma D.; Olivers CN.; Hickey C.; Theeuwes J. Early multisensory interactions affect the competition among multiple visual objects. Neuroimage. 2011, 55, 1208–1218. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuroimage.2010.12.068 PMID: 2119578
[8] Dinh HQ.; Walker N.; Hodges LF.; Song C.; Kobayashi A. Evaluating the importance of multi-sensory input on memory and the sense of presence in virtual environments. In Proceedings of IEEE Virtual Reality Conference; IEEE Ed.; Houston, TX, USA, 1999, pp. 222–228.
[9] Lammert-Siepmann N.; Bestgen AK.; Edler D.; Kuchinke L.; Dickmann F. (2017). Audiovisual communication of object-names improves the spatial accuracy of recalled object-locations in topographic maps. PloS one. 2017, 12(10), e0186065.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Comment. When it comes to the research question in the last paragraph of the second chapter, could you be a bit more precisely in terms of your study hypotheses? You have research questions which are related to the chain of argumentation in the introduction, no doubt. However, what direction / hypothesis would you expect from the cited literature? Operating with hypotheses would increase the quality and scientific soundness of the paper a bit more.
It is true that the adoption of operational transitivity could prescribe some hypotheses. However since the relevant research is very limited we hesitate to formulate them. Following the encouraging prompt, however, we have replaced the completely exploratory Research Questions with a form of more "hard" structured Research Questions.
Given that previous research has shown that children aged 5-6 years have the ability to express mental representations for non-tangible physical entities in space, before and / or after a teaching intervention, it seems that we can assume that children would the same cognitive ability for sound too. Thus, the following three research questions (RQ) were posed:
(RQ1) How and to what extent do children identify sound as physical entity as it appears in everyday life context.
(RQ2) How and to what extent children differentiate sounds based on its subjective characteristics.
(RQ3) How and to what extent do children state that sound is produced and propagated as a distinct physical entity?
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Comment. The discussion section lacks a detailed discussion with references to literature that backs up or contradicts the identified results. Could you extend the paragraphs and establish this connection?
In the new version of the Discussion, in the 2nd, 3rd, and 4th paragraphs, we have highlighted the findings of the other studies presented in section 2.2 and related them to the findings of our own research. These are the phrases that are highlighted in yellow.
Reviewer 3 Report
Line 239. Reflection. Reference to the findings of Hrepic, Zollman and Rebello [14] is missing. Can the wave model and the being model be confirmed on the basis of the above studies?
Line 239. Reflection. The study did not include the information about mediumship that Eshach and Schwartz [12] wrote about, and it turned out that by not considering the issue of mediumship children manifested more science-like responses. I think the differences in the results are worth considering. Could they be due to the way the research was conducted. The research used illustrations (2D) where children were asked to explain the nature of sound. Meanwhile, the natural area for sound to move is three-dimensional space. I realize that the linear movement of sound is easier to express in two-dimensional space, and this has been established by the authors of the study, but this does not mean that the phenomenon would be explained in the same way if during the study children were given the opportunity to explain how sounds propagate in three-dimensional space - especially since we are talking about a wave that propagates concentrically from the source in every direction. I suggest to consider adding the information that further research is needed to deepen the findings in this area.
Line 427. Two thoughts on the picture used in the research:
1. There is a white spot surrounding the mouse in the picture. Was it visible on the board presented to the children? If so, it may have influenced the children's answers. The white spot surrounds the mouse which means it is in a different colour area and therefore sound from that area may have to come through (?).
2. The next question is about the distance relationship in the picture. The picture shows animated (not real) characters which means that also the world that surrounds them can be associated with a fairy tale world. This in turn raises the question whether the laws of animated physics will not correlate here (?)
Line 499. Reflection. This conclusion seems particularly important in terms of educational practice. It seems important to pursue this issue in further research. Determining the reasons why these 11 children seem to present such mature thinking about the spread of sound (10% of those surveyed). The question arises as to why these particular children can describe the nature of sound so well. It is worth considering their experiences (could it be that they have had particular musical experiences?).
Line 526. Reflection. There is a perceived paucity of qualitative analysis relating to the reasoning path of individual children to specific research questions. There was a detailed analysis of the children (11) who gave the best answer to all the questions, but I believe that it would also be worthwhile to trace the path of answers of children classified as average and inadequate. Can a developmental model be established from these?
Author Response
We are very grateful to Reviewer 3 for his/her very important comments. We have tried to respond to all the comments. Below we present all the additions, changes and corrections we have made. Yellow highlighted phrases are included in the text of the revised paper.
Comment: Line 239. Reflection. Reference to the findings of Hrepic, Zollman and Rebello [14] is missing. Can the wave model and the being model be confirmed on the basis of the above studies?
In response to this comment we have added the following clarification (page 13)
The findings of the present study indicate that preschool children are able to conceptualize to some extent that sound spreads everywhere in space and propagates from source to the receiver. Undoubtedly, the form that sounds gets through this propagation may be interpreted by the ‘wave’ and ‘entity model’ found by Hrepic, Zollman and Rebello [17]. Indeed, these models could be implied in children responses regarding our three research questions. Nevertheless, as our study focus on 5-6 years old pupils, in contrast to Hrepic et al. [17] sample which consisted of university students, we decided to not deal with the appearance of these models in our children’s thinking.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Comment: Line 239. Reflection. The study did not include the information about mediumship that Eshach and Schwartz [12] wrote about, and it turned out that by not considering the issue of mediumship children manifested more science-like responses. I think the differences in the results are worth considering. Could they be due to the way the research was conducted. The research used illustrations (2D) where children were asked to explain the nature of sound. Meanwhile, the natural area for sound to move is three-dimensional space. I realize that the linear movement of sound is easier to express in two-dimensional space, and this has been established by the authors of the study, but this does not mean that the phenomenon would be explained in the same way if during the study children were given the opportunity to explain how sounds propagate in three-dimensional space - especially since we are talking about a wave that propagates concentrically from the source in every direction. I suggest to consider adding the information that further research is needed to deepen the findings in this area.
In response to this comment we have added the following clarification (page 14 and page 6)
Page 14
It should be noted as mentioned above Eshach and Schwartz [15] state that the way eighth-grade students conceptualize the notion of a wave or a medium affects the way they perceive both the nature sound and its propagation. Indicatively, a number of students who perceive sound as particles, draw different forms of particles in different media. In addition, students seem to attribute different mechanisms to the propagation of sound depending on the medium, for example bubble-like in air, but ray-like in water (p. 759). In some cases, sound does not only seem to change form as it travels from one medium to another, but also the type of material through which is propagated is totally modified. However, given the fact that the present study did not make use of different mediums through which sound propagates, the effect of the medium on children's mental representations was not investigated. On the other hand, while the only medium that was available for discussion with children was air, it was apparent from relevant questions that children seem to recognize that sound is spread everywhere in space. Consequently, the construction of a mental transition step from source to receiver seems likely to take place on children’s thinking. Undoubtedly, it would be interesting in a future endeavor to investigate whether authentic ideas exist among preschool children related to sound propagation mechanisms.
Page 6
In addition the use of image (Figure 1) may have limited the expression of children's ideas, because it is a two-dimensional representation, as opposed to the fact that sound is evenly distributed throughout the three-dimensional space. This is a limitation of the research, which can be customized by designing data collection scenarios with 3D entities.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Comment. Line 427. Two thoughts on the picture used in the research:
- There is a white spot surrounding the mouse in the picture. Was it visible on the board presented to the children? If so, it may have influenced the children's answers. The white spot surrounds the mouse which means it is in a different colour area and therefore sound from that area may have to come through (?).
We would like to thank you for this point, as it gives us the opportunity to correct an error in the submitted draft. The image used in the interviews was the one shown below. Intentionally, the image was completely free of any unnecessary element which could influence children's thinking.
- The next question is about the distance relationship in the picture. The picture shows animated (not real) characters which means that also the world that surrounds them can be associated with a fairy tale world. This in turn raises the question whether the laws of animated physics will not correlate here (?)
In response to this comment we have added the following clarification (pages 5-6)
Regarding the third RQ, in task 3.3 the researchers decided to embed animated characters on Figure 1, so that children feel comfortable and happy. The usage of not real characters did not affect research results, as no kind of feature related to fairy tale world appeared in any of students’ ideas. The above mentioned point had been also confirmed by an earlier pilot test for this image.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Comment. Line 499. Reflection. This conclusion seems particularly important in terms of educational practice. It seems important to pursue this issue in further research. Determining the reasons why these 11 children seem to present such mature thinking about the spread of sound (10% of those surveyed). The question arises as to why these particular children can describe the nature of sound so well. It is worth considering their experiences (could it be that they have had particular musical experiences?).
This point is very important, and we had deep thoughts about it both in the present as well previous previous researches about light propagation. The discussion could be take place in two contexts: the first is that of child development and the second is that of teaching intervention and interaction. Along this line we added the following text to the Discussion (page 14).
However, it would be quite interesting for feature research to investigate which kind of experiences and interactions enable such a developmental pathway which in turn leads some children to construct operational transitivity for sound. In this direction, a distinct stream of Early Childhood Science Education seeks to study the conditions and prerequisites for the construction of a precursor models; that is stable entities of thought that have characteristics compatible with those of school physics [36]
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Comment. Line 526. Reflection. There is a perceived paucity of qualitative analysis relating to the reasoning path of individual children to specific research questions. There was a detailed analysis of the children (11) who gave the best answer to all the questions, but I believe that it would also be worthwhile to trace the path of answers of children classified as average and inadequate. Can a developmental model be established from these?
It is difficult to claim that the responses of children classified as average and inadequate lead to a model. However we have added the following commentary which highlights the key features which in a teaching intervention perspective would make sense to be explicit (page 15).
However, in general, central elements of children's average and inadequate reasoning are closely related to the perceptual data of the proposed situations and especially to the materials that create sounds, the human voice or the actions that lead to the sound’s creation. The transition to a state of reasoning that recognizes sound as a physical entity presupposes activities of decentralization from these elements.
Round 2
Reviewer 2 Report
The authors thoroughly addressed the points of the first review round in a revised manuscript version. The argumentation of the changes is clear. Therefore, I have no more concerns regarding a recommendation for publication.
