Dads and baby talk: understanding the role of paternal interaction in infant-directed speech
Fathers learning on the job: Role of Paternity Leave Duration on Paternal Infant-Directed Speech and Preference for Male Infant-Directed Speech in infants
Recommendation: posted 18 November 2022, validated 18 November 2022
Chambers, C. (2022) Dads and baby talk: understanding the role of paternal interaction in infant-directed speech. Peer Community in Registered Reports, . https://rr.peercommunityin.org/articles/rec?id=222
Level of bias control achieved: Level 6. No part of the data or evidence that will be used to answer the research question yet exists and no part will be generated until after IPA.
List of eligible PCI RR-friendly journals:
- Advances in Cognitive Psychology
- Experimental Psychology
- Infant and Child Development
- Journal of Cognition
- Peer Community Journal
- Royal Society Open Science
- Swiss Psychology Open
The recommender in charge of the evaluation of the article and the reviewers declared that they have no conflict of interest (as defined in the code of conduct of PCI) with the authors or with the content of the article.
Evaluation round #2
DOI or URL of the report: https://osf.io/5qjuk/?view_only=6157272caf124259b467900f6f0664b3
Version of the report: v2
Author's Reply, 09 Nov 2022
Decision by Chris Chambers, posted 17 Oct 2022
Your revised manuscript has now been evaluated by the three reviewers. I'm happy to see good progress, but there are some remaining issues to iron out before IPA. In my own reading of both the reviews and the manuscript, core issues to address include residual concerns surrounding (1) measurement reliability, (2) crucial methodological detail, and (3) age of the infant sample. Please respond comprehensively to all issues in a revised manuscript and response. Provided you are able to fully address all of the points raised by the reviewers, we may then be able to issue IPA without further in-depth review.
Reviewed by Krista Byers-Heinlein, 13 Oct 2022
Reviewed by Melanie Soderstrom, 07 Oct 2022
Reviewed by Naja Ferjan Ramírez, 07 Oct 2022
Evaluation round #1
DOI or URL of the report: https://osf.io/w7k2b?view_only=af30057f71474783a6d7629b985fa4b1
Author's Reply, 05 Oct 2022
Decision by Chris Chambers, posted 03 Sep 2022, validated 17 Oct 2022
Three expert reviewers have now assessed the Stage 1 manuscript. As you will see, the evaluations are broadly positive about your proposal while also offering a range of points for consideration and constructive suggestions for improvement. The three most substantive issues to address in revision are (1) considering whether the sample size and measurement reliability are sufficient to avoid futility in the analysis of individual differences, (2) resolving the potentially confounding role of paternal knowledge, attitudes, and beliefs, and (3) distinguishing measurement of paternal caregiving from amount of experience reading to the child. The reviewers also ask for consideration of additional literature in the Introduction, additional methodological details, justification of trial numbers, clarification of procedural contingencies, and ensuring that proposed procedures are reproducible from the description in the manuscript (rather than relying on secondary references to previous studies/methods).
Overall, based on these reviews and my own reading of the manuscript, I believe the study is a promising candidate for eventual Stage 1 acceptance and I am happy to invite a revision and response.