Cara DiYanni

Contact Info

Email: cdiyanni [at] rider.edu

Phone Number: 609-896-7761

Department: Department of Psychology

Office Location: Mike and Patti Hennessy Science and Technology Center

Additional Info:

Academic Focus: Psychology

About Dr. DiYanni

  • Dr. DiYanni has a Ph.D. in early childhood cognitive development.
  • She graduated from Boston University鈥檚 doctoral program in 2006.
  • She has worked at 小优视频 since 2008.
  • Each semester, she recruits motivated undergraduate students who are interested in child development and in gaining research experience to work in her lab.
  • Her research projects examine children鈥檚 imitation, social learning, play, and imagination.
  • ALL projects have involved student helpers!

Research Goals

  • Dr. DiYanni is interested in imitation and how far children are willing to go to copy a model.
  • She is also interested in social learning in general, and what factors influence children鈥檚 decisions to learn (or not to learn) from others, and to pass on (or not to pass on) what they have learned.
  • She also has a passion for the importance of play and imagination in early childhood development.

Current Research Projects

  1. The Influence of a Model's Use of Conventional Language on Children's Selection of an Inefficient Tool in a Speeded (Pressured) Task:
    • Children are presented with a model who intentionally selects an inefficient tool to complete a task (e.g., selects an object made of fuzzy pom poms over a sturdier alternative to crush a cookie).
    • The model either uses conventional language ("Everyone always does it like this") or instrumental language ("I am going to...").
    • The child is given an opportunity to complete the task themselves and is asked to select which tool they would need (e.g., the fuzzy, inefficient one that the model selected, or the sturdy, efficient alternative that the model chose not to use). 
    • After a couple minutes of a distractor task (e.g., building with blocks), the child is again presented with the task, but in a speeded situation. For example, they are asked to crush a series of FOUR cookies "as quickly as possible."
    • Results to date indicate a high compliance with the model's choice of the inefficient tool in the initial trial after she uses conventional language (which is in line with the findings of previous research).
    • However, in the speeded trials, imitation rates drop significantly.
    • Data collection is currently in process for the instrumental condition to see whether imitation rates drop in the initial trial, and even further in the speeded trial.
  2. The Benefits of Outdoor Education and Outdoor Play:
    • Children attending an outdoor education program were observed for several weeks during their outdoor classes, and were interviewed at the end of each class session.
    • The children鈥檚 parents were also surveyed before, during, and after the class.
    • Each survey, interview, and observation assessed children鈥檚 self-reliance, self-regulation, curiosity, risk-taking, motor skills, and appreciation of and connection to nature.
    • Children were also compared to a demographically similar sample of children who had never attended outdoor education classes to determine the impact of the program on their development.
    • Results indicated that children who attended outdoor education classes scored higher in self-reliance, curiosity and risk-taking, and appreciation of/ connection to nature.
    •  further detail the findings of this multi-part study.
    • Poster presentation (PDF) representing some of the findings of this outdoor education study.
  3. In a COVID-19 World, Play in Schools is More Important than Ever Before:
    • Teachers, parents, and children in Pre-K through 3rd grade teachers were all asked about the amount of play that should be (vs. currently is) part of their (children's/ students') daily school life.
    • Play in Schools Presentation (PDF)
    • representing more detailed findings from this study
  4. How did COVID-19 affect the play of children?
    • Parents of children ages 3-10 were surveyed about how their children's outdoor play, engagement in structured vs. unstructured play, and screen time was affected by the emergence of the pandemic, quarantine, and a return to in-person learning.
    • COVID-19 Impact on Play (PDF)
    • representing more detailed findings from this study
  5. How do children's perceptions of an informants' prior imitation decisions affect their trust in those informants?
    • We showed children ages 4-6 a few videos over Zoom and got their feedback on a few questions. 
    • First, participants watched a model choosing a tool that was inefficient for a task (e.g., 鈥渃rushing鈥 a cookie with a tool made of fuzzy pom-poms) rather than a tool that would work effectively for the task (e.g., with a solid handle and solid bottom).
    • Then, two other 鈥渋nformants鈥 made decisions about whether or not to copy the model鈥檚 choice. 
      • When they were presented with a cookie to crush, one informant used the same pom-pom tool as the model, and one informant chose a more effective alternative.
      • After that, children were shown a series of objects, and each informant suggested different ways to use those objects
      • Children were asked who they believe. The question was whether they would endorse the ideas of the informant who copied the original model, or the informant who went her own direction (but chose the more effective tool). 
        • Two tools used in an experiment
          Oreo cookie on a paper plate
        • Then, two other 鈥渋nformants鈥 will make decisions about whether or not to copy the model鈥檚 choice. 
          • When they are presented with a cookie to crush, one informant will use the same pom-pom tool as the model and one informant will choose a more effective alternative.
          • After that, the child will be shown a series of objects, and each informant will suggest different ways to use those objects
            Wooden block
            Melon baller
            Wooden block shaped like a person
        • Children are asked who they believe. The question is whether they endorse the ideas of the informant who copied the original model, or the informant who went her own direction (but chose the more effective tool). 

Contact Us

For more information about any of the current studies, the research program in general, or previous studies, contact Dr. Cara DiYanni: cdiyanni@rider.edu

Past Projects

The basic task involves a model鈥檚 deliberate choice of an inefficient tool rather than an efficient tool to complete the task, and then children are offered the choice to complete the task. For example, the model may choose a tool made of fuzzy pom-poms - rather than a tool with a sturdy handle and solid bottom - to crush a cookie.

Two tools used in an experiment
Oreo cookie on a paper plate
  • When given the opportunity to complete the task themselves, do children copy the model鈥檚 inefficient choice, and risk sacrificing goal completion?
  • Or do they choose instead to go against the model, but use the tool that would work much better for the task at hand?
  • What factors influence children鈥檚 decisions when a model deliberately chooses an inefficient tool for a task? To date, some factors we have examined include:
    • Intention of the model (鈥極ops鈥 vs. 鈥楾here鈥)
    • Model鈥檚 statements about the design of the tool (鈥楾his one was made for鈥︹)
    • Number of models (1 vs. 3)
    • Age of the model (child vs. adult)
    • Language of the model (鈥業 am going to鈥︹ vs. 鈥榃e always do it this way.鈥) 
    • Familiarity of the model (parent vs. stranger)
    • Presence of the model (the one from the video is in the room with the child vs. absent from the room when the child makes their choice)
    • Gender of the model (same vs. different from the child) 
    • Cultural background of the child (Chinese-American vs. Caucasian)
    • Personality of the child (strong desire to please others vs. less concern with pleasing others)
    • Timing of the task (need to complete it under a time crunch vs. no time constraint)

Publications 

Below is a list of Dr. DiYanni鈥檚 publications. For pdf鈥檚 of any of the articles, contact cdiyanni@rider.edu.

  • DiYanni, C.J, Clegg, J.M., & Corriveau, K.H. (2022). If I told you everyone picked that (non-affordant tool), would you? Children attend to conventional language when imitating and transmitting tool use. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 214, 105293.
  • Corriveau, K.H., DiYanni, C.J., Clegg, J.M., Min, G., Chin, J., & Nasrini, J. (2017). Cultural differences in the imitation and transmission of inefficient actions. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 161, 1-18.
  • DiYanni, C., Corriveau, K.H., Kurkul, K., Nasrini, J., Nini, D., & (2015). The role of consensus and culture in the imitation of inefficient actions. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 137, 99-110.
  • DiYanni, C., Nini, D., Rheel, W., & Livelli, A. (2012). 鈥淚 won鈥檛 trust you if I think you鈥檙e trying to deceive me鈥: Relations between selective trust, theory of mind, and imitation in early childhood. Journal of Cognition and Development, 13, 354-371.
  • DiYanni, C., Nini, D., & Rheel, W. (2011). Looking good versus doing good: Which factors take precedence when children learn about new tools? Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 110, 575-591.
  • DiYanni, C., & Kelemen, D. (2008). Using a bad tool with good intention: Young children鈥檚 imitation of adults鈥 questionable choices. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 101, 241-261.
  • DiYanni, C., & Kelemen, D. (2005). Time to get a new mountain? The role of function in children鈥檚 conceptions of natural kinds.  Cognition, 97, 327-335.
  • Kelemen, D., & DiYanni, C. (2005). Intuitions about origins: Purpose and intelligent design in children's reasoning about nature. Journal of Cognition and Development, 6, 3-31.
  • Howard, D. V., Howard, J. H., Jr., Japikse, K. C., DiYanni, C., Thompson, A., & Somberg, R. (2004).  Implicit sequence learning: Effects of level of structure, adult age, and extended practice. Psychology and Aging.