RESÚMEN

ANALÍTICO

1. Información técnica
La importancia de aspectos sensoriales y espaciales en la lectura familiar en
Título
casa: conclusiones de una encuesta nacional en Noruega.

Autores Natalia Ingebretsen Kucirkova, Janine Anne Campbell, Elisabeth Brekke

Stangeland.
Temas Lectura compartida, familia, alfabetización temprana
Referencia Kucirkova, N. I., Campbell, J. A., Stangeland, E. B., & Hoel, T. (2023). The
(Acceso al importance of sensorial and spatial aspects in family reading at home: Insights
documento) from a national survey in Norway. International Journal of Educational
Research Open, 4, 100227. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijedro.2023.100227

Tipo de
documento Artículo de investigación.
Palabras clave Lectura compartida, familia, sentidos, multisensorial, alfabetización temprana

2. RAI
Síntesis:

El estudio tuvo como objetivo investigar las orientaciones de los padres hacia los aspectos sensoriales
y espaciales de la lectura y cómo se relacionan con las características estructurales y los informes de
la lectura compartida de libros (SBR) en el hogar. El estudio utilizó un cuestionario de encuesta para
recopilar datos de padres en Noruega, y los resultados revelaron algunos hallazgos y limitaciones
interesantes que podrían informar futuras investigaciones en esta área.

La lectura compartida se considera una actividad fundamental durante la primera infancia, y existe
una sólida base de evidencia de sus beneficios para el desarrollo de los niños. En el estudio se
mencionan los siguientes aspectos:

Desarrollo del lenguaje: ayuda a los niños a desarrollar su vocabulario, gramática y habilidades de
sintaxis, así como sus habilidades de comprensión y narrativa.

Desarrollo cognitivo mejorado: la lectura compartida estimula el desarrollo cognitivo de los niños al
promover su atención, memoria y habilidades de resolución de problemas.

Mayor desarrollo socioemocional: fomenta el desarrollo socioemocional de los niños al promover su

empatía, habilidades sociales y regulación emocional.

Mejor rendimiento académico: tiene un impacto positivo en el rendimiento académico de los niños,
particularmente en lectura y escritura.

Existen variaciones en la práctica de la lectura compartida entre y dentro de las familias, y algunas
iniciativas financiadas por el gobierno Noruego y con fondos privados apoyan la SBR en las familias,
como brindar acceso universal a libros y capacitación de los padres para leerles a sus hijos.
Noruega es un caso especial en los estudios de lectura infantil debido al fuerte apoyo del país a la
alfabetización familiar y a una larga tradición de literatura infantil. Ya que hay un alto nivel de vida,
con varias políticas estatales favorables a la familia, incluido el cuidado infantil subsidiado y la
licencia parental, con una cuota de licencia parental reservada a los padres. En comparación con otros
países europeos, se sabe que los niños noruegos tienen una gran calidad de vida, viven en hogares con
cobertura de Internet casi universal y tienen acceso a servicios públicos altamente digitalizados,
incluido el acceso a escuelas y bibliotecas.

Además, se destaca que la percepción pública y el apoyo gubernamental estratégico a la literatura

infantil es elevado en los países nórdicos, incluida Noruega. Por ejemplo, Finlandia, Noruega y
Suecia tienen institutos dedicados a los libros infantiles, y la lectura infantil recibe apoyo activo a
través de iniciativas bibliotecarias y escolares. Los estudios críticos de literatura infantil nórdica son
un campo de investigación vibrante, y se sabe que los libros impresos para niños noruegos son una
exportación cultural reconocida internacionalmente.

Dentro de los resultados el estudio encontró correlaciones estadísticamente significativas entre los
factores estructurales y las orientaciones de lectura compartida (SBR) en todas las instancias. Las
correlaciones más grandes se encontraron entre la edad del niño y el número de libros leídos al niño,
el nivel educativo del padre y la reportación de una rutina de lectura establecida, y el nivel educativo
del padre y el número de libros leídos al niño.

El estudio también examinó los informes de los padres sobre los factores sensoriales y sus rutinas de
lectura compartida y encontró que las orientaciones de los padres hacia los aspectos sensoriales y
espaciales de la lectura variaban entre las familias. Las diferencias entre la clasificación de los
aspectos espaciales y sensoriales de la lectura por parte de los padres encuestados, tanto padres como
madres, agregaron información valiosa de la estructura de la familia y sus métodos, el estudio
proporciona información valiosa sobre cómo los factores estructurales y las orientaciones de los
padres hacia los aspectos sensoriales y espaciales de la lectura pueden influir en las prácticas de
lectura compartida en el hogar.
Dentro de los hallazgos se encuentra que los factores estructurales, como la edad y el nivel educativo
de los padres, estaban significativamente correlacionados con las prácticas de lectura compartida. Los
padres con un nivel educativo más alto eran más propensos a tener una rutina de lectura establecida y
leer más libros a sus hijos. Además, el estudio encontró que los padres valoraban de manera diferente
los aspectos espaciales y sensoriales de la lectura. Los padres valoraban más el aspecto espacial,
como la comodidad del asiento, mientras que las madres valoraban más el aspecto sensorial de los
libros, como el aspecto visual.

El estudio también destacó la importancia de considerar los aspectos sensoriales y espaciales de la

lectura en las prácticas de alfabetización familiar. Las orientaciones de los padres hacia estos aspectos
variaban entre las familias, y la participación corporal en la lectura tenía un valor diferente para
hombres y mujeres. También, se sugiere que los padres pueden mejorar las habilidades de
alfabetización temprana de sus hijos al considerar los aspectos sensoriales y espaciales de la lectura y
adaptar sus prácticas de lectura compartida en consecuencia.

En general, el estudio proporciona información valiosa sobre cómo los factores estructurales y las
orientaciones de los padres hacia los aspectos sensoriales y espaciales de la lectura pueden influir en
las prácticas de lectura compartida en el hogar. Al considerar estos factores, los padres pueden
mejorar las habilidades de alfabetización temprana de sus hijos y promover el amor por la lectura que
puede durar toda la vida.

Estructura:
El artículo está dividido en: resumen, introducción, definición y conceptos claves, objetivos,
metodología, resultados, discusión y limitaciones.
Metodología:
La metodología del artículo involucró el análisis de datos de una muestra representativa a nivel
nacional de padres que viven en Noruega. El estudio utilizó un cuestionario de encuesta para
recopilar datos sobre los factores sensoriales y las rutinas de lectura compartida de los padres. La
encuesta se administró en línea e incluyó preguntas sobre la frecuencia de la lectura compartida, los
tipos de libros leídos y los aspectos sensoriales y espaciales de la lectura. El estudio también recopiló
información demográfica sobre los padres, como su edad, nivel educativo y género. Los datos se
analizaron utilizando métodos estadísticos para identificar asociaciones entre los informes de los
padres sobre los factores sensoriales y sus prácticas de lectura compartida. El estudio también utilizó
métodos cualitativos para analizar las respuestas abiertas de los padres sobre sus experiencias con la
lectura compartida. En general, el estudio utilizó un enfoque de métodos mixtos para proporcionar
una comprensión integral del papel de los aspectos sensoriales y espaciales en las prácticas de lectura
familiar.
Conclusiones:
A continuación se presentan las conclusiones encontradas en el estudio:

1. Los factores sensoriales y espaciales son importantes en la lectura compartida en familia y pueden
mejorar la experiencia de lectura y el desarrollo de habilidades de alfabetización temprana en los
niños.

2. Los padres pueden mejorar la experiencia de lectura compartida al involucrar múltiples sentidos,
como el tacto y la vista, y al crear un ambiente cómodo y acogedor para la lectura.

3. Los padres pueden mejorar la calidad de la lectura compartida al elegir libros que sean apropiados
para la edad y los intereses de sus hijos, y al hacer preguntas y comentarios que fomenten la
comprensión y el diálogo.

4. Los padres pueden mejorar la frecuencia de la lectura compartida al establecer rutinas regulares de
lectura y al aprovechar oportunidades para leer en diferentes contextos, como en la naturaleza o en la
cocina.

5. Los hallazgos del estudio tienen implicaciones para la práctica educativa y la política pública, y
sugieren que se deben fomentar prácticas de lectura compartida que involucren múltiples sentidos y
que se adapten a las necesidades y preferencias de las familias.
Fuentes: Se usaron 77 fuentes como apoyo teórico para la realización del artículo, todos con
tematicas de alfabetismo emergente y lectura compartida.

1. Anderson, J., Anderson, A., Lynch, J., & Shapiro, J. (2004). Examining the effects of
gender and genre on interactions in shared book reading. Literacy Research and Instruction,
43(4), 1–20.
2. Alaca, I. V. (2022). Consumable reading and children’s literature: Food, taste and material
interactions. London: John Benjamins Publications.
3. Bader, C. D., & Desmond, S. A. (2006). Do as I say and as I do: The effects of consistent
parental beliefs and behaviors upon religious transmission. Sociology of religion, 67 (3),
313–329.
4. Barnyak, N. C. (2011). A qualitative study in a rural community: Investigating the attitudes,
beliefs, and interactions of young children and their parents regarding storybook read
alouds. Early Childhood Education Journal, 39(2), 149–159.
5. Baron, N. S. (2021). How we read now: Strategic choices for print, screen, and audio.
Oxford University Press.
6. Bergman Deitcher, D., Aram, D., & Adar, G. (2019). Book selection for shared reading:
Parents’ considerations and researchers’ views. Journal of Early Childhood Literacy, 19(3),
291–315.
7. Berry, C.J. (2014). Publishing, translation, archives: Nordic children’s literature in the
United Kingdom, 1950-2000. Thesis submitted for the fulfilment of a PhD degree at the
 University of Edinburgh, UK.
8. Bornstein, M. H., Putnick, D. L., Lansford, J. E., Pastorelli, C., Skinner, A. T., Sorbring, E.,
et al. (2015). Mother and father socially desirable responding in nine countries: Two kinds
of agreement and relations to parenting self-reports. International Journal of Psychology,
50(3), 174–185.
9. Bus, A. G., Van Ijzendoorn, M. H., & Pellegrini, A. D. (1995). Joint book reading makes
for success in learning to read: A meta-analysis on intergenerational transmission of
literacy. Review of Educational Research, 65(1), 1–21.
10. Campbell, C. J., & Schindler, H. S. (2022). Emerging Ideas: Father–child exchanges,
configurations, and discourse during shared book-reading: An interaction analysis. Family
Relations.
11. Carmiol, A. M., Sparks, A., & Conejo, L. D. (2022). Book sharing and reminiscing:
Caregivers’ conversational style and children’s language and literacy development in low-
income Costa Rican families. Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 60, 110–125.
12. Cingel, D., & Piper, A. M. (2017). How parents engage children in tablet-based reading
experiences: An exploration of haptic feedback. In Proceedings of the 2017 ACM
Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work and Social Computing (pp. 505–
510).
13. Daniels, D., Salley, B., Walker, C., & Bridges, M. (2022). Parent book choices: How do
parents select books to share with infants and toddlers with language impairment? Journal
of Early Childhood Literacy, 22(2), 279–307. https://doi.org/10.1177/ 1468798420985668
14. DeBaryshe, B. D. (1995). Maternal belief systems: Linchpin in the home reading process.
Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology, 16(1), 1–20.
15. Djonov, E., Tseng, C. I., & Lim, F. V. (2021). Children’s experiences with a transmedia
narrative: Insights for promoting critical multimodal literacy in the digital age. Discourse,
Context & Media, 43, Article 100493.
16. Dickinson, D. K., & Morse, A. B. (2019). Connecting through talk. Nurturing children’s
development with language. Baltimore: Brookes. Doucet, A. (2006). ‘Estrogen-filled
worlds’: Fathers as primary caregivers and embodiment. The Sociological Review, 54(4),
696–716.
17. 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), e383–e399.
18. Edirisinghe, C., Podari, N., & Cheok, A. D. (2018). A multi-sensory interactive reading
experience for visually impaired children; a user evaluation. Personal and Ubiquitous
Computing, 1–13. Ehret, C., & Rowsell, J. (2021). Literacy, affect, and uncontrollability.
Reading Research Quarterly, 56(2), 201–206.
19. Endendijk, J. J., Groeneveld, M. G., Van der Pol, L. D., Van Berkel, S. R.,
HallersHaalboom, E. T., Mesman, J., et al. (2014). Boys don’t play with dolls: Mothers’
and fathers’ gender talk during picture book reading. Parenting, 14(3–4), 141–161.
20. Erstad, O., & Gijle, Ø. (2008). Regaining impact: Media Education and Media Literacy in a
Norwegian Context. Nordicom review, 29(2).
21. Farinosi, M., Lim, C., & Roll, J. (2016). Book or screen, pen or keyboard? A cross-cultural
sociological analysis of writing and reading habits basing on Germany, Italy and the UK.
Telematics and Informatics, 33(2), 410–421.
22. Fenwick, T., & Landri, P. (2012). Materialities, textures and pedagogies: Socio-material
assemblages in education. Pedagogy, Culture & Society, 20(1), 1–7.
23. Fletcher, K. L., & Reese, E. (2005). Picture book reading with young children: A
conceptual framework. Developmental Review, 25(1), 64–103.
24. Goodwin, M. H., & Cekaite, A. (2018). Embodied family choreography: Practices of
control, care, and mundane creativity. London: Routledge.
25. Grandpierre, V., Nassrallah, F., Potter, B. K., Fitzpatrick, E. M., Thomas, R., Taylor, J., et
al. (2019). Examining cultural competence in pediatric hearing loss services: A survey.
Deafness & Education International, 21(4), 174–194.
26. Hargrave, A. C., & S´en´echal, M. (2000). A book reading intervention with preschool
children who have limited vocabularies: The benefits of regular reading and dialogic
reading. Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 15(1), 75–90.
27. Hemmerechts, K., Agirdag, O., & Kavadias, D. (2017). The relationship between parental
literacy involvement, socio-economic status and reading literacy. Educational Review,
69(1), 85–101.
28. Hoel, T., & Tønnessen, E. S. (2019). Organizing shared digital reading in groups:
Optimizing the affordances of text and medium. AERA Open, 5(4).
29. Hoel, T., Stangeland, E. B., & Schulz-Heidorf, K. (2020). What happens before book
reading starts? An analysis of teacher–child behaviours with print and digital books.
Frontiers in Psychology, 3092.
30. Holden, G. W., & Edwards, L. A. (1989). Parental attitudes toward child rearing:
Instruments, issues, and implications. Psychological Bulletin, 106(1), 29.
31. Johri, A. (2022). Augmented sociomateriality: Implications of artificial intelligence for the
field of learning technology. Research in Learning Technology, 30.
32. Klomberg, B., Schilhab, T., & Burke, M. (2022). Picturing fiction through embodied
cognition: Drawn representations and viewpoint in literary texts. London/New York:
Routledge.
33. Kluczniok, K., Lehrl, S., Kuger, S., & Rossbach, H. G. (2013). Quality of the home
learning environment during preschool age–Domains and contextual conditions. European
Early Childhood Education Research Journal, 21(3), 420–438.
34. Korat, O., Shamir, A., & Heibal, S. (2013). Expanding the boundaries of shared book
reading: E-books and printed books in parent–child reading as support for children’s
language. First Language, 33(5), 504–523.
35. Kucirkova, N. (2021). Socio-material directions for developing empirical research on
children’s e-reading: A systematic review and thematic synthesis of the literature across
disciplines. Journal of Early Childhood Literacy, 21(1), 148–174.
36. Kucirkova, N., & Flewitt, R. (2022). Understanding parents’ conflicting beliefs about
children’s digital book reading. Journal of Early Childhood Literacy, 22(2), 157–181.
Kuzmiˇcov´ a, A. (2016). Does it matter where you read? Situating narrative in physical
environment. Communication Theory, 26(3), 290–308.
37. Kuzmiˇcov´ a, A., Dias, P., Vogrinˇciˇc Cepi ˇ ˇc, A., Albrechtslund, A. M., Casado, A.,
Kotrla Topi´c, M., et al. (2018). Reading and company: embodiment and social space in
silent reading practices. Literacy, 52(2), 70–77.
38. Leander, K., & Boldt, G. (2013). Rereading “A pedagogy of multiliteracies” bodies, texts,
and emergence. Journal of Literacy Research, 45(1), 22–46.
39. Leander, K. M., & Ehret, C. (Eds.). (2019). Affect in literacy learning and teaching:
Pedagogies, politics and coming to know. London/New York: Routledge.
40. Leseman, P. P., & De Jong, P. F (1998). Home literacy: Opportunity, instruction,
cooperation and social-emotional quality predicting early reading achievement. Reading
Research Quarterly, 33(3), 294–318.
41. Levy, R., & Hall, M. (2021). Family literacies: Reading with young children. Routledge.
42. Leyva, D., Shapiro, A., Yeomans-Maldonado, G., Weiland, C., & Leech, K. (2022).
Positive impacts of a strengths-based family program on Latino kindergarteners’ narrative
language abilities. Developmental Psychology, 58(5), 835–847. https://doi.org/
10.1037/dev0001332
43. Leyva, D., von Suchodoletz, A., Shroff, D., Hinojo, A., & Kartner, ¨ J. (2021). Maternal
book-sharing styles and goals and children’s verbal contributions in three communities.
Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 54, 228–238.
44. Makransky, G., Borre-Gude, S., & Mayer, R. E. (2019). Motivational and cognitive
benefits of training in immersive virtual reality based on multiple assessments. Journal of
Computer Assisted Learning, 35(6), 691–707.
45. Malin, J. L., Cabrera, N. J., & Rowe, M. L. (2014). Low-income minority mothers’ and
fathers’ reading and children’s interest: Longitudinal contributions to children’s receptive
 vocabulary skills. Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 29(4), 425–432.
46. Mangen, A. (2008). Hypertext fiction reading: Haptics and immersion. Journal of Research
in Reading, 31(4), 404–419.
47. Mangen, A. (2016). What hands may tell us about reading and writing. Educational Theory,
66(4), 457–477.
48. Mangen, A., Walgermo, B. R., & Brønnick, K. (2013). Reading linear texts on paper versus
computer screen: Effects on reading comprehension. International Journal of Educational
Research, 58, 61–68.
49. Mangen, A., & Van der Weel, A. (2016). The evolution of reading in the age of
digitisation: An integrative framework for reading research. Literacy, 50(3), 116–124.
50. Mangen, A., Hoel, T., & Moser, T. (2019). Technologies, affordances, children and
embodied reading: A call for interdisciplinarity. The Routledge International Handbook of
Learning with Technology in Early Childhood (pp. 235–247). Routledge. s.
51. Martin, K. J., Beck, A. F., Xu, Y., Szumlas, G. A., Hutton, J. S., Crosh, C. C., et al. (2022).
Shared reading and risk of social-emotional problems. Pediatrics, 149(1).
52. McLuhan, M. (1964). Understanding media: The extensions of man. Nova Iorque:
McGrowHill.
53. Mills, K. A. (2015). Literacy theories for the digital age. Social, Critical, Multimodal,
Spatial, Material and Sensory Lenses. Literacy theories for the digital age.
54. DeGruyter: Multilingual Matters. Mills, K. A., Scholes, L., & Brown, A. (2022). Virtual
reality and embodiment in multimodal meaning making. Written Communication,
07410883221083517.
55. Müller, M. (2015). Assemblages and actor-networks: Rethinking socio-material power,
politics and space. Geography Compass, 9(1), 27–41.
56. Noble, C., Sala, G., Peter, M., Lingwood, J., Rowland, C., Gobet, F., et al. (2019). The
impact of shared book reading on children’s language skills: A meta-analysis. Educational
Research Review, 28, Article 100290.
57. Niklas, F., Cohrssen, C., & Tayler, C. (2016). The sooner, the better: Early reading to
children. SAGE Open, 6(4). https://doi.org/10.1177/2158244016672715 OECD (2022)
OECD Better Life Index: Norway. Accessed online 5th of May 2022, http
s://www.oecdbetterlifeindex.org/countries/norway/.
58. Pace, A., Burchinal, P., Alper, R., Hirsh-Pasek, K., & Golinkoff, R. M. (2019). Measuring
success: Within and cross-domain predictors of academic and social trajectories in
elementary school. Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 46, 112–125.
59. Pacheco-Costa, A., & Guzm´ an-Simon, ´ F. (2021). The (im) materiality of literacy in
early childhood: A socio-material approach to online and offline events. Journal of Early
Childhood Research, 19(3), 369–380.
60. Partridge, H. A. (2004). Helping parents make the most of shared book reading. Early
Childhood Education Journal, 32(1), 25–30.
61. R Core Team. (2021). R: A language and environment for statistical computing. Vienna: R
Foundation for Statistical Computing. Available online: Https://www.R-project.org
(accessed on 14-12-2021).
62. R Studio Team. (2021). RStudio: Integrated development for R. Boston: RStudio, PBC.
Available online: Http://www.rstudio.com/ (accessed on 14-12-2021).
63. Rowsell, J., & Walsh, M. (2011). Rethinking literacy education in new times:
Multimodality, multiliteracies & new literacies. Brock Education: A Journal of Educational
Research and Practice, 53–62.
64. Rudvin, M. (1994). Translation and ‘myth’: Norwegian children’s literature in English.
Perspectives: Studies in Translatology, 2(2), 199–211.
65. Savva, M., Higgins, S., & Beckmann, N. (2022). Meta-analysis examining the effects of
electronic storybooks on language and literacy outcomes for children in grades Pre-K to
grade 2. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 38(2), 526–564. S´en´echal, M. (2017).
Shared book reading: An informal literacy activity par excellence. The Routledge
international handbook of early literacy education, 273–283.
 66. Serafini, F. (2020). Understanding visual images in picturebooks. In J. Evans (Ed.), Talking
beyond the page (pp. 10–25). Routledge.
67. Serafini, F., & Reid, S. F. (2022). Analyzing picturebooks: Semiotic, literary, and artistic
frameworks. Visual Communication, 14703572211069623.
68. Sipe, L. R. (2001). Picturebooks as aesthetic objects. Literacy, Teaching and Learning,
6(1), 23–42. Spence, C. (2011). Crossmodal correspondences: A tutorial review. Attention,
Perception, & Psychophysics, 73(4), 971–995.
69. Stougaard Pedersen, B., Engberg, M., Have, I., Henkel, A. Q., Mygind, S., & Bundgaard
Svendsen, H. (2021). To move, to touch, to listen: multisensory aspects of the digital
reading condition. Poetics Today, 42(2), 281–300.
70. Strouse, G. A., & Ganea, P. A. (2017). A print book preference: Caregivers report higher
child enjoyment and more adult–child interactions when reading print than electronic
books. International Journal of Child-Computer Interaction, 12, 8–15.
71. Sylva, K., Melhuish, E., Sammons, P., Siraj-Blatchford, I., & Taggart, B. (2004). The
effective provision of pre-school education (EPPE) project: Final report: A longitudinal
study funded by the DfES 1997-2004. Institute of Education, University of London/
Department for Education and Skills/Sure Start.
72. Thorbergsen, E. (2007). Barnehagens rom: - nye muligheter. Oslo: Pedagogisk forum.
Tilley, H. (2018). Portraying blindness: Nineteenth-century images of tactile reading.
Disability Studies Quarterly, 38(3).
73. Trasmundi, S. B., Kokkola, L., Schilhab, T., & Mangen, A. (2021). A distributed
perspective on reading: Implications for education. Language Sciences, 84, Article 101367.
74. Uzwiak, B. A., & Bowles, L. R. (2021). Epistolary storytelling: A feminist sensory
orientation to ethnography. The Senses and Society, 16(2), 203–222.
75. Van Steensel, R. (2006). Relations between socio-cultural factors, the home literacy
environment and children’s literacy development in the first years of primary education.
Journal of Research in Reading, 29(4), 367–382.
76. Van Steensel, R., Gouw, B., Liefers, S., & van Aspert, T. (2022). Cognitively challenging
talk during shared reading: Effects of parent gender, child gender and relations with story
comprehension. Journal of Early Childhood Literacy, 14687984221082240.
77. Westin, B. (2003). The Nordic Countries. In P. Hunt (Ed.), International companion
encyclopedia of children’s literature (pp. 1156–1168). London/New York: Routledge.

Análisis del RAI

El artículo se centra en un tema que es clave durante la primera infancia, como lo es la lectura
compartida. Si bien, este estudio es realizado en Noruega que se podría decir es una potencia en
temas de alfabetismo emergente, ya ha demostrado todos los beneficios que se logran a nivel de
lenguaje, cognición, la esfera socioafectiva y el rendimiento académico. Dentro del artículo, se
destaca que no se trata solamente realizar la lectura compartida de los padres con los niños sino que
también los espacios y la estimulación multisensorial es clave y como es importante instruir a los
padres en este aspecto para que sea aún más provechosa esta práctica.

Ahora bien, es necesario ubicarse en el contexto colombiano en el cual aún queda mucho por
recorrer en términos de alfabetismo emergente y como el gobierno debe invertir más en este aspecto,
para que las leyes de primera infancia como la ley de 0 a siempre, adquieran más fuerza y la familia
esté cada vez más implicada en promover hábitos como la lectura y la estimulación temprana. Este
artículo da bases de los impactos positivos que se podrían lograr y dar puntos de partida para que se
empiece a impartir en Colombia.

Por otra parte, es importante empezar a incluir prácticas de entrenamiento a padres en lectura
compartida en contextos pequeños para generar más evidencia de estos impactos positivos. Esto se
puede lograr por medio de talleres a padres que se centren en mostrar la importancia del alfabetismo
emergente y su papel en el hogar. En espacios como la práctica en educación sería un entorno clave
para generar cambio desde lo micro, llevando más allá el pensamiento popular de: “es bueno leer” a
“la lectura enriquece el desarrollo de los niños”, siendo los padres y/o cuidadores agentes
primordiales, teniendo todos los conocimientos para que la lectura sea un éxito teniendo en cuenta
las pautas que maneja la lectura compartida.

María Angela Simancas del Castillo

RAI elaborado por
(31/08/2023)

ANALYTICAL SUMMARY

Technical information
The importance of sensorial and spatial aspects in family reading at home:
Title
Insights from a national survey in Norway

Authors Natalia Ingebretsen Kucirkova, Janine Anne Campbell, Elisabeth Brekke

Stangeland.
Topics Shared reading, family, early literacy
Reference Kucirkova, N. I., Campbell, J. A., Stangeland, E. B., & Hoel, T. (2023). The
(Access to importance of sensory and spatial aspects in family reading at home: Insights
document) from a national survey in Norway. International Journal of Educational
Research Open, 4, 100227. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijedro.2023.100227.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijedro.2023.100227

Type of
document Research article.
Key words Shared reading, family, senses, multi-sensory, early literacy

2. RAI
Synthesis:

The study aimed to investigate parental orientations toward sensory and spatial aspects of reading and
how they relate to structural features and reports of shared book reading (SBR) at home. The study
used a survey questionnaire to collect data from parents in Norway, and the results revealed some
interesting findings and limitations that could inform future research in this area.

Shared reading is considered a fundamental activity during early childhood, and there is a solid
evidence base of its benefits for children's development. The following aspects are mentioned in the
study:

Language development: helps children develop their vocabulary, grammar and syntax skills, as well
as comprehension and narrative skills.

Enhanced cognitive development: shared reading stimulates children's cognitive development by

promoting their attention, memory and problem-solving skills.
Increased social-emotional development: fosters children's social-emotional development by
promoting empathy, social skills and emotional regulation.

Improved academic performance: has a positive impact on children's academic performance,

particularly in reading and writing.

There are variations in the practice of shared reading between and within families, and some
Norwegian government and privately funded initiatives support SBR in families, such as providing
universal access to books and training parents to read to their children.

Norway is a special case in children's reading studies because of the country's strong support for
family literacy and a long tradition of children's literature. Since there is a high standard of living,
with several family-friendly state policies, including subsidized child care and parental leave, with a
parental leave quota reserved for fathers. Compared to other European countries, Norwegian children
are known to have a high quality of life, live in households with almost universal Internet coverage
and have access to highly digitized public services, including access to schools and libraries.

In addition, it is noted that public perception and strategic government support for children's literature
is high in the Nordic countries, including Norway. For example, Finland, Norway, and Sweden have
dedicated children's book institutes, and children's reading is actively supported through library and
school initiatives. Critical studies of Nordic children's literature is a vibrant field of research, and
Norwegian children's print books are known to be an internationally recognized cultural export.

Within the results the study found statistically significant correlations between structural factors and
shared reading orientations (SBR) in all instances. The largest correlations were found between the
child's age and the number of books read to the child, the parent's educational level and the reporting
of an established reading routine, and the parent's educational level and the number of books read to
the child.

The study also examined parents' reports of sensory factors and their shared reading routines and
found that parents' orientations toward sensory and spatial aspects of reading varied across families.
The differences between the ratings of spatial and sensory aspects of reading by the parents surveyed,
both fathers and mothers, added valuable information on family structure and their methods, the study
provides valuable information on how structural factors and parental orientations toward sensory and
spatial aspects of reading may influence shared reading practices in the home.
Among the findings were that structural factors, such as parents' age and educational level, were
significantly correlated with shared reading practices. Parents with a higher educational level were
more likely to have an established reading routine and read more books to their children. In addition,
the study found that parents valued the spatial and sensory aspects of reading differently. Fathers
valued more the spatial aspect, such as seating comfort, while mothers valued more the sensory
aspect of books, such as the visual aspect.

The study also highlighted the importance of considering sensory and spatial aspects of reading in
family literacy practices. Parental orientations toward these aspects varied across families, and bodily
engagement in reading had different value for males and females. Also, it is suggested that parents
can improve their children's early literacy skills by considering sensory and spatial aspects of reading
and adapting their shared reading practices accordingly.

Overall, the study provides valuable information on how structural factors and parental orientations
toward sensory and spatial aspects of reading can influence shared reading practices in the home. By
considering these factors, parents can improve their children's early literacy skills and promote a love
of reading that can last a lifetime.

Structure:
 The article is divided into an abstract, introduction, definition and key concepts, objectives,
methodology, results, discussion and limitations.
Methodology:
The methodology of the article involved the analysis of data from a nationally representative sample
of parents living in Norway. The study used a survey questionnaire to collect data on sensory factors
and parents' shared reading routines. The survey was administered online and included questions on
frequency of shared reading, types of books read, and sensory and spatial aspects of reading. The
study also collected demographic information about the parents, such as their age, educational level,
and gender. The data were analyzed using statistical methods to identify associations between
parents' reports of sensory factors and their shared reading practices. The study also used qualitative
methods to analyze parents' open-ended responses about their experiences with shared reading.
Overall, the study used a mixed methods approach to provide a comprehensive understanding of the
role of sensory and spatial aspects in family reading practices.
Conclusions:
The conclusions of the study are presented below:

1. Sensory and spatial factors are important in shared family reading and can enhance the reading
experience and the development of early literacy skills in children.

2. Parents can enhance the shared reading experience by engaging multiple senses, such as touch and
sight, and by creating a comfortable and welcoming environment for reading.

3. Parents can improve the quality of shared reading by choosing books that are appropriate for their
children's age and interests, and by asking questions and making comments that encourage
comprehension and dialogue.

4. Parents can improve the frequency of shared reading by establishing regular reading routines and
taking advantage of opportunities to read in different contexts, such as in nature or in the kitchen.

5. The findings of the study have implications for educational practice and public policy, and suggest
that shared reading practices that involve multiple senses and that are adapted to the needs and
preferences of families should be encouraged.
Sources: 77 sources were used as theoretical support for the article, all with themes of emergent
literacy and shared reading.

1. Anderson, J., Anderson, A., Lynch, J., & Shapiro, J. (2004). Examining the effects of
gender and genre on interactions in shared book reading. Literacy Research and Instruction,
43(4), 1-20.
2. Alaca, I. V. (2022). Consumable reading and children's literature: Food, taste and material
interactions. London: John Benjamins Publications.
3. Bader, C. D., & Desmond, S. A. (2006). Do as I say and as I do: The effects of consistent
parental beliefs and behaviors upon religious transmission. Sociology of religion, 67 (3),
313-329.
4. Barnyak, N. C. (2011). A qualitative study in a rural community: Investigating the attitudes,
beliefs, and interactions of young children and their parents regarding storybook read
alouds. Early Childhood Education Journal, 39(2), 149-159.
5. Baron, N. S. (2021). How we read now: Strategic choices for print, screen, and audio.
Oxford University Press.
6. Bergman Deitcher, D., Aram, D., & Adar, G. (2019). Book selection for shared reading:
Parents' considerations and researchers' views. Journal of Early Childhood Literacy, 19(3),
291-315.
7. Berry, C.J. (2014). Publishing, translation, archives: Nordic children's literature in the
United Kingdom, 1950-2000. Thesis submitted for the fulfilment of a PhD degree at the
University of Edinburgh, UK.
8. Bornstein, M. H., Putnick, D. L., Lansford, J. E., Pastorelli, C., Skinner, A. T., Sorbring, E.,
et al. (2015). Mother and father socially desirable responding in nine countries: Two kinds
of agreement and relations to parenting self-reports. International Journal of Psychology,
50(3), 174-185.
9. Bus, A. G., Van Ijzendoorn, M. H., & Pellegrini, A. D. (1995). Joint book reading makes
for success in learning to read: A meta-analysis on intergenerational transmission of
literacy. Review of Educational Research, 65(1), 1-21.
10. Campbell, C. J., & Schindler, H. S. (2022). Emerging Ideas: Father-child exchanges,
configurations, and discourse during shared book-reading: An interaction analysis. Family
Relations.
11. Carmiol, A. M., Sparks, A., & Conejo, L. D. (2022). Book sharing and reminiscing:
Caregivers' conversational style and children's language and literacy development in low-
income Costa Rican families. Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 60, 110-125.
12. Cingel, D., & Piper, A. M. (2017). How parents engage children in tablet-based reading
experiences: An exploration of haptic feedback. In Proceedings of the 2017 ACM
Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work and Social Computing (pp. 505-
510).
13. Daniels, D., Salley, B., Walker, C., & Bridges, M. (2022). Parent book choices: How do
parents select books to share with infants and toddlers with language impairment? Journal
of Early Childhood Literacy, 22(2), 279-307. https://doi.org/10.1177/
146879842098566668.
14. DeBaryshe, B. D. (1995). Maternal belief systems: Linchpin in the home reading process.
Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology, 16(1), 1-20.
15. Djonov, E., Tseng, C. I., & Lim, F. V. (2021). Children's experiences with a transmedia
narrative: Insights for promoting critical multimodal literacy in the digital age. Discourse,
Context & Media, 43, Article 100493.
16. Dickinson, D. K., & Morse, A. B. (2019). Connecting through talk. Nurturing children's
development with language. Baltimore: Brookes. Doucet, A. (2006). 'Estrogen-filled
worlds': Fathers as primary caregivers and embodiment. The Sociological Review, 54(4),
696-716.
17. 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), e383-e399.
18. Edirisinghe, C., Podari, N., & Cheok, A. D. (2018). A multi-sensory interactive reading
experience for visually impaired children; a user evaluation. Personal and Ubiquitous
Computing, 1-13. Ehret, C., & Rowsell, J. (2021). Literacy, affect, and uncontrollability.
Reading Research Quarterly, 56(2), 201-206.
19. Endendijk, J. J., Groeneveld, M. G., Van der Pol, L. D., Van Berkel, S. R.,
HallersHaalboom, E. T., Mesman, J., et al. (2014). Boys don't play with dolls: Mothers' and
fathers' gender talk during picture book reading. Parenting, 14(3-4), 141-161.
20. Erstad, O., & Gijle, Ø. (2008). Regaining impact: Media Education and Media Literacy in a
Norwegian Context. Nordicom review, 29(2).
21. Farinosi, M., Lim, C., & Roll, J. (2016). Book or screen, pen or keyboard? A cross-cultural
sociological analysis of writing and reading habits basing on Germany, Italy and the UK.
Telematics and Informatics, 33(2), 410-421.
22. Fenwick, T., & Landri, P. (2012). Materialities, textures and pedagogies: Socio-material
assemblages in education. Pedagogy, Culture & Society, 20(1), 1-7.
23. Fletcher, K. L., & Reese, E. (2005). Picture book reading with young children: A
conceptual framework. Developmental Review, 25(1), 64-103.
24. Goodwin, M. H., & Cekaite, A. (2018). Embodied family choreography: Practices of
control, care, and mundane creativity. London: Routledge.
25. Grandpierre, V., Nassrallah, F., Potter, B. K., Fitzpatrick, E. M., Thomas, R., Taylor, J., et
al. (2019). Examining cultural competence in pediatric hearing loss services: A survey.
Deafness & Education International, 21(4), 174-194.
26. Hargrave, A. C., & S'en'echal, M. (2000). A book reading intervention with preschool
children who have limited vocabularies: The benefits of regular reading and dialogic
reading. Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 15(1), 75-90.
27. Hemmerechts, K., Agirdag, O., & Kavadias, D. (2017). The relationship between parental
literacy involvement, socio-economic status and reading literacy. Educational Review,
69(1), 85-101.
28. Hoel, T., & Tønnessen, E. S. (2019). Organizing shared digital reading in groups:
Optimizing the affordances of text and medium. AERA Open, 5(4).
29. Hoel, T., Stangeland, E. B., & Schulz-Heidorf, K. (2020). What happens before book
reading starts? An analysis of teacher-child behaviours with print and digital books.
Frontiers in Psychology, 3092.
30. Holden, G. W., & Edwards, L. A. (1989). Parental attitudes toward child rearing:
Instruments, issues, and implications. Psychological Bulletin, 106(1), 29.
31. Johri, A. (2022). Augmented sociomateriality: Implications of artificial intelligence for the
field of learning technology. Research in Learning Technology, 30.
32. Klomberg, B., Schilhab, T., & Burke, M. (2022). Picturing fiction through embodied
cognition: Drawn representations and viewpoint in literary texts. London/New York:
Routledge.
33. Kluczniok, K., Lehrl, S., Kuger, S., & Rossbach, H. G. (2013). Quality of the home
learning environment during preschool age-Domains and contextual conditions. European
Early Childhood Education Research Journal, 21(3), 420-438.
34. Korat, O., Shamir, A., & Heibal, S. (2013). Expanding the boundaries of shared book
reading: E-books and printed books in parent-child reading as support for children's
language. First Language, 33(5), 504-523.
35. Kucirkova, N. (2021). Socio-material directions for developing empirical research on
children's e-reading: A systematic review and thematic synthesis of the literature across
disciplines. Journal of Early Childhood Literacy, 21(1), 148-174.
36. Kucirkova, N., & Flewitt, R. (2022). Understanding parents' conflicting beliefs about
children's digital book reading. Journal of Early Childhood Literacy, 22(2), 157-181.
Kuzmiˇcov' a, A. (2016). Does it matter where you read? Situating narrative in physical
environment. Communication Theory, 26(3), 290-308.
37. Kuzmiˇcov' a, A., Dias, P., Vogrinˇciˇc Cepi ˇ ˇc, A., Albrechtslund, A. M., Casado, A.,
Kotrla Topi'c, M., et al. (2018). Reading and company: embodiment and social space in
silent reading practices. Literacy, 52(2), 70-77.
38. Leander, K., & Boldt, G. (2013). Rereading "A pedagogy of multiliteracies" bodies, texts,
and emergence. Journal of Literacy Research, 45(1), 22-46.
39. Leander, K. M., & Ehret, C. (Eds.). (2019). Affect in literacy learning and teaching:
Pedagogies, politics and coming to know. London/New York: Routledge.
40. Leseman, P. P., & De Jong, P. F (1998). Home literacy: Opportunity, instruction,
cooperation and social-emotional quality predicting early reading achievement. Reading
Research Quarterly, 33(3), 294-318.
41. Levy, R., & Hall, M. (2021). Family literacies: Reading with young children. Routledge.
42. Leyva, D., Shapiro, A., Yeomans-Maldonado, G., Weiland, C., & Leech, K. (2022).
Positive impacts of a strengths-based family program on Latino kindergarteners' narrative
language abilities. Developmental Psychology, 58(5), 835-847. https://doi.org/
10.1037/dev0001332.
43. Leyva, D., von Suchodoletz, A., Shroff, D., Hinojo, A., & Kartner, ¨ J. (2021). Maternal
book-sharing styles and goals and children's verbal contributions in three communities.
Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 54, 228-238.
44. Makransky, G., Borre-Gude, S., & Mayer, R. E. (2019). Motivational and cognitive
benefits of training in immersive virtual reality based on multiple assessments. Journal of
Computer Assisted Learning, 35(6), 691-707.
45. Malin, J. L., Cabrera, N. J., & Rowe, M. L. (2014). Low-income minority mothers' and
fathers' reading and children's interest: Longitudinal contributions to children's receptive
 vocabulary skills. Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 29(4), 425-432.
46. Mangen, A. (2008). Hypertext fiction reading: Haptics and immersion. Journal of Research
in Reading, 31(4), 404-419.
47. Mangen, A. (2016). What hands may tell us about reading and writing. Educational Theory,
66(4), 457-477.
48. Mangen, A., Walgermo, B. R., & Brønnick, K. (2013). Reading linear texts on paper versus
computer screen: Effects on reading comprehension. International Journal of Educational
Research, 58, 61-68.
49. Mangen, A., & Van der Weel, A. (2016). The evolution of reading in the age of
digitisation: An integrative framework for reading research. Literacy, 50(3), 116-124.
50. Mangen, A., Hoel, T., & Moser, T. (2019). Technologies, affordances, children and
embodied reading: A call for interdisciplinarity. The Routledge International Handbook of
Learning with Technology in Early Childhood (pp. 235-247). Routledge. s.
51. Martin, K. J., Beck, A. F., Xu, Y., Szumlas, G. A., Hutton, J. S., Crosh, C. C., et al. (2022).
Shared reading and risk of social-emotional problems. Pediatrics, 149(1).
52. McLuhan, M. (1964). Understanding media: The extensions of man. Nova Iorque:
McGrowHill.
53. Mills, K. A. (2015). Literacy theories for the digital age. Social, Critical, Multimodal,
Spatial, Material and Sensory Lenses. Literacy theories for the digital age.
54. DeGruyter: Multilingual Matters. Mills, K. A., Scholes, L., & Brown, A. (2022). Virtual
reality and embodiment in multimodal meaning making. Written Communication,
0741088883221083517.
55. Müller, M. (2015). Assemblages and actor-networks: Rethinking socio-material power,
politics and space. Geography Compass, 9(1), 27-41.
56. Noble, C., Sala, G., Peter, M., Lingwood, J., Rowland, C., Gobet, F., et al. (2019). The
impact of shared book reading on children's language skills: A meta-analysis. Educational
Research Review, 28, Article 100290.
57. Niklas, F., Cohrssen, C., & Tayler, C. (2016). The sooner, the better: Early reading to
children. SAGE Open, 6(4). https://doi.org/10.1177/2158244016672715 OECD (2022)
OECD Better Life Index: Norway. Accessed online 5th of May 2022, http
s://www.oecdbetterlifeindex.org/countries/norway/.
58. Pace, A., Burchinal, P., Alper, R., Hirsh-Pasek, K., & Golinkoff, R. M. (2019). Measuring
success: Within- and cross-domain predictors of academic and social trajectories in
elementary school. Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 46, 112-125.
59. Pacheco-Costa, A., & Guzm' an-Simon, ' F. (2021). The (im) materiality of literacy in early
childhood: A socio-material approach to online and offline events. Journal of Early
Childhood Research, 19(3), 369-380.
60. Partridge, H. A. (2004). Helping parents make the most of shared book reading. Early
Childhood Education Journal, 32(1), 25-30.
61. R Core Team (2021). R: A language and environment for statistical computing. Vienna: R
Foundation for Statistical Computing. Available online: Https://www.R-project.org
(accessed on 14-12-2021).
62. R Studio Team (2021). RStudio: Integrated development for R. Boston: RStudio, PBC.
Available online: www.rstudio.com/ (accessed on 14-12-2021).
63. Rowsell, J., & Walsh, M. (2011). Rethinking literacy education in new times:
Multimodality, multiliteracies & new literacies. Brock Education: A Journal of Educational
Research and Practice, 53-62.
64. Rudvin, M. (1994). Translation and 'myth': Norwegian children's literature in English.
Perspectives: Studies in Translatology, 2(2), 199-211.
65. Savva, M., Higgins, S., & Beckmann, N. (2022). Meta-analysis examining the effects of
electronic storybooks on language and literacy outcomes for children in grades Pre-K to
grade 2. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 38(2), 526-564. S'en'echal, M. (2017).
Shared book reading: An informal literacy activity par excellence. The Routledge
international handbook of early literacy education, 273-283.
 66. Serafini, F. (2020). Understanding visual images in picturebooks. In J. Evans (Ed.), Talking
beyond the page (pp. 10-25). Routledge.
67. Serafini, F., & Reid, S. F. (2022). Analyzing picturebooks: Semiotic, literary, and artistic
frameworks. Visual Communication, 14703572211069623.
68. Sipe, L. R. (2001). Picturebooks as aesthetic objects. Literacy, Teaching and Learning,
6(1), 23-42. Spence, C. (2011). Crossmodal correspondences: A tutorial review. Attention,
Perception, & Psychophysics, 73(4), 971-995.
69. Stougaard Pedersen, B., Engberg, M., Have, I., Henkel, A. Q., Mygind, S., & Bundgaard
Svendsen, H. (2021). To move, to touch, to listen: multisensory aspects of the digital
reading condition. Poetics Today, 42(2), 281-300.
70. Strouse, G. A., & Ganea, P. A. (2017). A print book preference: Caregivers report higher
child enjoyment and more adult-child interactions when reading print than electronic books.
International Journal of Child-Computer Interaction, 12, 8-15.
71. Sylva, K., Melhuish, E., Sammons, P., Siraj-Blatchford, I., & Taggart, B. (2004). The
effective provision of pre-school education (EPPE) project: Final report: A longitudinal
study funded by the DfES 1997-2004. Institute of Education, University of London/
Department for Education and Skills/Sure Start.
72. Thorbergsen, E. (2007). Barnehagens rom: - nye muligheter. Oslo: Pedagogisk forum.
Tilley, H. (2018). Portraying blindness: Nineteenth-century images of tactile reading.
Disability Studies Quarterly, 38(3).
73. Trasmundi, S. B., Kokkola, L., Schilhab, T., & Mangen, A. (2021). A distributed
perspective on reading: Implications for education. Language Sciences, 84, Article 101367.
74. Uzwiak, B. A., & Bowles, L. R. (2021). Epistolary storytelling: A feminist sensory
orientation to ethnography. The Senses and Society, 16(2), 203-222.
75. Van Steensel, R. (2006). Relations between socio-cultural factors, the home literacy
environment and children's literacy development in the first years of primary education.
Journal of Research in Reading, 29(4), 367-382.
76. Van Steensel, R., Gouw, B., Liefers, S., & van Aspert, T. (2022). Cognitively challenging
talk during shared reading: Effects of parent gender, child gender and relations with story
comprehension. Journal of Early Childhood Literacy, 14687984221082240.
77. Westin, B. (2003). The Nordic Countries. In P. Hunt (Ed.), International companion
encyclopedia of children's literature (pp. 1156-1168). London/New York: Routledge.

RAI Analysis
The article focuses on a topic that is key during early childhood, such as shared reading. Although
this study was conducted in Norway, which is a powerhouse in emerging literacy issues, it has
already demonstrated all the benefits achieved at the level of language, cognition, the socio-affective
sphere and academic performance. The article highlights that it is not only about shared reading
between parents and children, but also that spaces and multisensory stimulation are key and how
important it is to instruct parents in this aspect to make this practice even more profitable.

Now, it is necessary to place ourselves in the Colombian context in which there is still a long way to
go in terms of emergent literacy and how the government should invest more in this aspect, so that
early childhood laws such as the 0 to always law, acquire more strength and the family is
increasingly involved in promoting habits such as reading and early stimulation. This article provides
a basis for the positive impacts that could be achieved and gives starting points to begin to be
implemented in Colombia.

On the other hand, it is important to begin to include parent training practices in shared reading in
small contexts to generate more evidence of these positive impacts. This can be achieved through
parent workshops that focus on showing the importance of emergent literacy and its role in the
home. In spaces such as education practice would be a key environment to generate change from the
micro, taking beyond the popular thinking of: "it is good to read" to "reading enriches children's
development", with parents and/or caregivers being primary agents, having all the knowledge to
make reading a success taking into account the guidelines that shared reading manages.

María Angela Simancas del Castillo

RAI prepared by
(31/08/2023)