Both the kinds of exchanges and the context under which children are questioned may affect the quality of data. Yet, little is known about how developmental scientists communicate with children for research. Using manifest content analysis, the 3,119 manuscripts published in the top 20 developmental outlets in 2018 were coded for methodology, examining whether researchers communicated directly with children, how they did so, and how they contextualized questioning. We found that over 65% of empirical publications presenting new data questioned children. Researchers used a variety of methodologies (e.g., 64% questionnaires, 51% assessments, 5% interviews). As age increased, the odds of giving children standardized questionnaires, closed-ended questions, and Likert-type questions increased. Researchers rarely reported how they contextualized questioning and rarely utilized supplemental materials. Researchers should consider collecting more qualitative data, better reporting methodologies, and utilizing online spaces to share supplemental materials. These modifications can ensure that we produce the strongest data.
Human Development

中文翻译：

---

研究人员如何质疑儿童和青少年？发展研究方法的系统评估

交流的种类和询问儿童的背景都可能影响数据的质量。然而，对于发育科学家如何与儿童进行研究交流知之甚少。使用清单内容分析，对 2018 年在前 20 大发展媒体上发表的 3,119 份手稿进行了方法编码，检查研究人员是否直接与儿童交流，他们是如何交流的，以及他们如何将提问背景化。我们发现，超过 65% 的实证出版物在展示新数据时都对儿童提出了质疑。研究人员使用了多种方法（例如，64% 的问卷、51% 的评估、5% 的访谈）。随着年龄的增长，给孩子标准化问卷、封闭式问题和李克特式问题的几率增加。研究人员很少报告他们如何将提问背景化，也很少使用补充材料。研究人员应考虑收集更多的定性数据、更好的报告方法，并利用在线空间共享补充材料。这些修改可以确保我们产生最强大的数据。
人类发展