The evaluative component in children’s narratives: Comparison of two intervention procedures

Given that interaction among peers is proved to be useful in the development of cognitive and narrative skills, this study compares the effects of an intervention based on the interaction among peers (INTP) and one between child and adult focused on the causes of events (CosCau) (Veneziano, 2009), o n the ability to tell coherent stories that take into account the causes of events and the internal states of the characters. INTRODUCTION Before 8-9 years few children express the evaluative component of narratives such as the explanation of events or the internal states of the characters of a story. However, when properly supported, they can reach higher performances (e,g,,Veneziano & Hudelot, 2009; Strasser et al.). On the assumption that peer interaction can lead to a sociocognitive conflict soliciting children to argue in favor of their position and to coordinate different points of view, thus enhancing higher-level cognitive skills (Buchs & Butera, 2004), our hypothesis was that an intervention based on interaction among peers(INTP) could strengthen children' narrative skills, especially in evaluative discourse. To test this hypothesis, the study compares the INTP condition with an adult-child intervention that focuses children's attention on the causes of the events of the story (e.g., Veneziano & Hudelot, 2009), which proved to be effective.