Trusted by +2 million users,
1000+ happy students everyday
1000+ happy students everyday
Showing pages 1 to 3 of 10 pages
Running head: CHILDREN AND ANIMALSCHILDREN AND ANIMALSName of student:Name of university:Author note:
1CHILDREN AND ANIMALSAssignment 3: Research Report on children and animalsIntroduction:Animals constitute an important part in our everyday life right from childhoodto adulthood. This may be attributed to the large number of household with pets (Liegghio,Nelson and Evans 2010) Studies have demonstrated that contact with animals bear positiveoutcome for the children and foster their developmental trajectories. The aim of this criticalresearch report is to compare and contrast the two research projects on children and animals.These articles areAttitude towards animals among kindergartenchildren by Marta Borgi andFrancesca Cirulli and Adog who I know quite wellby Becky Tipper.Attitudes towards animals among kindergarten children: Species preferencesSummary:This article by Borgi and Cirulli (2015), encapsulates the attitude of the childrentowards animals. Although, there has been relevant studies to examine the interest of childrentowards animals and their preference for different species of animals, there has been a gap inthe literature. Most of the studies were performed on children who were above the age of 6years. In this light, the paper strives to provide an insight into the psyche of children belowthe age of 6 year and identify their motivation behind animal preference.Project Aim/Purpose:From the outset of the research, it was clear that the authors wereengaged in ascertaining the attitude of the children towards the different species of animalsand at the same time locating the influence of gender in such preference. The literatureengaged by the authors demonstrate that predilection towards animals decrease with the age.Secondly, girls have been found to have preference domestic animals whereas boys are moreinclined towards wild animals. The findings of the author reinforces the results derived fromthe previous research and therefore, is consistent with the existing literature.
2CHILDREN AND ANIMALSResearch paradigm:The authors deployed an experimental research paradigm a forced-choice task where two photographic stimuli were simultaneously presented to the children.The child participants were given the autonomy to select their any one of the photographs.This was done with the aim of evaluating the preferences of the young children. Consideringthat biological scientists conducted the research, the epistemological stance of the research isinfluenced by positivism (Ritchie, Lewis, Nicholls and Ormston 2013). Children were studiedin their familiar settings of the kindergarten. The language of the study is imbued with thepower dynamics shared between the researcher and the research participant (Corsaro 2017).The usage of the terms ‘allow’ by the authors reeks of the purported hierarchical nature of therelationship that is characteristic of positivist research.Methodologies used:Mixed-method approach was adopted for this study considering themultiple methods that were used ranging from the visual aids comprising of the pictures,videos, drawings amongst others. Children were provided with coloured photographs thatillustrated different species of animals. The methods used by the researchers involve lessinteraction with the children and is more concerned with studying the reactions of thechildren. This can be a valid criticism considering that there was no exploratory thrust todelve deeper into the psyche of the childrenStrengths and Weaknesses of Methodologies used:the strength of the methodologies usedfor the study is that children whilst viewing the photographs the information extracted,influences the responses of the participants. Secondly, pictures have the potential to triggermemories of the experiences. Another highlight of this study is the importance paid to genderidentity in determining the preference for animals. The weakness of the study lies in theexclusion criteria for sample. Since children with intellectual disability were excluding fromthe study, the findings are incomplete and lacks in inclusiveness. This may also be attributed