<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<!DOCTYPE article
  PUBLIC "-//NLM//DTD JATS (Z39.96) Journal Publishing DTD v1.1 20151215//EN" "https://jats.nlm.nih.gov/publishing/1.1/JATS-journalpublishing1.dtd">
<article article-type="research-article" dtd-version="1.1" specific-use="sps-1.9" xml:lang="en"
 xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink">
 <front>
  <journal-meta>
   <journal-id journal-id-type="publisher-id">redie</journal-id>
   <journal-title-group>
    <journal-title>Revista electrónica de investigación educativa</journal-title>
    <abbrev-journal-title abbrev-type="publisher">REDIE</abbrev-journal-title>
   </journal-title-group>
   <issn pub-type="epub">1607-4041</issn>
   <publisher>
    <publisher-name>Universidad Autónoma de Baja California, Instituto de Investigación
     y Desarrollo Educativo</publisher-name>
   </publisher>
  </journal-meta>
  <article-meta>
   <article-id pub-id-type="doi">10.24320/redie.2021.23.e21.4168</article-id>
   <article-id pub-id-type="other">00021</article-id>
   <article-categories>
    <subj-group subj-group-type="heading">
     <subject>Artículos</subject>
    </subj-group>
   </article-categories>
   <title-group>
    <article-title>Socio-Affective Word Production by Early Childhood Educators: Lexical
     Densities, Clusters, and Predictors</article-title>
    <trans-title-group xml:lang="es">
     <trans-title>Producción de palabras socioafectivas por educadoras de párvulos:
      densidades léxicas, conglomerados y predictores</trans-title>
    </trans-title-group>
   </title-group>
   <contrib-group>
    <contrib contrib-type="author">
     <contrib-id contrib-id-type="orcid">0000-0001-6326-2567</contrib-id>
     <name>
      <surname>Lería Dulčić</surname>
      <given-names>Francisco José</given-names>
     </name>
     <xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff1"><sup>1</sup></xref>
    </contrib>
    <contrib contrib-type="author">
     <contrib-id contrib-id-type="orcid">0000-0002-7977-7570</contrib-id>
     <name>
      <surname>Acosta Peña</surname>
      <given-names>Roxana Nora</given-names>
     </name>
     <xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff2"><sup>2</sup></xref>
    </contrib>
    <contrib contrib-type="author">
     <contrib-id contrib-id-type="orcid">0000-0002-2127-5885</contrib-id>
     <name>
      <surname>Sasso Orellana</surname>
      <given-names>Patricia Ester</given-names>
     </name>
     <xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff2"><sup>2</sup></xref>
    </contrib>
   </contrib-group>
   <aff id="aff1">
    <label>1</label>
    <institution content-type="original"> Universidad de Atacama</institution>
    <institution content-type="normalized">Universidad de Atacama</institution>
    <institution content-type="orgname">Universidad de Atacama</institution>
    <country country="CL">Chile</country>
   </aff>
   <aff id="aff2">
    <label>2</label>
    <institution content-type="original">Universidad de Antofagasta</institution>
    <institution content-type="normalized">Universidad de Antofagasta</institution>
    <institution content-type="orgname">Universidad de Antofagasta</institution>
    <country country="CL">Chile</country>
   </aff>
   <pub-date date-type="pub" publication-format="electronic">
    <day>19</day>
    <month>10</month>
    <year>2021</year>
   </pub-date>
   <pub-date date-type="collection" publication-format="electronic">
    <year>2021</year>
   </pub-date>
   <volume>23</volume>
   <elocation-id>e21</elocation-id>
   <history>
    <date date-type="received">
     <day>07</day>
     <month>05</month>
     <year>2020</year>
    </date>
    <date date-type="accepted">
     <day>09</day>
     <month>10</month>
     <year>2020</year>
    </date>
   </history>
   <permissions>
    <license license-type="open-access"
     xlink:href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/" xml:lang="en">
     <license-p>This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the
      Creative Commons Attribution License</license-p>
    </license>
   </permissions>
   <abstract>
    <title>Abstract</title>
    <p>This article presents a quantitative characterization of the language of early
     childhood educators, with the goal of identifying their lexical preferences and
     typical uses in the socio-affective domain. In this cross-sectional, descriptive
     study, 20 participants were selected by convenience sampling and provided
     continuous audio recordings, which were transcribed and categorized using
     LIWC2015 software. The findings show that the greatest lexical densities are
     associated with the categories “cognitive processes”, “relativity”, “social
     processes”, “affective processes”, and “perceptual processes”, and a number of
     subcategories like “motion” and “positive emotion”. Lower densities were found
     in “anxiety”, “sadness”, health”, “religion”, and “death”. Furthermore, two
     commonly used clusters were identified: one centered on words with an emotional
     connotation, and another centered on words with a social connotation. Lastly,
     the categories “body”, “health”, “motion”, “ingestion”, “causation”,
     “exclusion”, and “sexual” are good predictors of socio-affective word
     production. Our findings suggest a distinctive and prominent use of a number of
     semantic categories associated with the socio-affective domain. Future research
     directions and their potential to contribute to formative processes in early
     childhood education are also discussed.</p>
   </abstract>
   <trans-abstract xml:lang="es">
    <title>Resumen</title>
    <p>Se presenta una caracterización cuantitativa del lenguaje de las educadoras de
     párvulos con el objetivo de determinar sus preferencias léxicas y los usos
     típicos en el dominio socioafectivo. Mediante un diseño descriptivo transversal
     se seleccionó por conveniencia a 20 participantes que proporcionaron grabaciones
     de audio continuas que fueron transcritas y categorizadas mediante el programa
     LIWC2015. Los hallazgos muestran que las mayores densidades léxicas están
     asociadas a las categorías “procesos cognitivos”, “relatividad”, “procesos
     sociales”, “procesos afectivos” y “procesos de percepción” y diversas
     subcategorías como “movimiento” y “emociones positivas”. Se encontraron menores
     densidades en “ansiedad”, “tristeza”, “salud”, “religión” y “muerte”. Además, se
     identificaron dos conglomerados de uso común: uno centrado en el uso de palabras
     con connotación emocional y otro centrado en palabras con connotación social.
     Finalmente, las categorías “cuerpo”, “salud”, “movimiento”, “ingesta”,
     “causalidad”, “exclusión” y “sexual” son buenos predictores de la producción de
     palabras socioafectivas. Nuestros hallazgos sugieren el uso distintivo y
     destacado de varias categorías semánticas asociadas al dominio socioafectivo. Se
     discuten las proyecciones de este estudio y su potencial para contribuir a los
     procesos formativos en la educación parvularia.</p>
   </trans-abstract>
   <kwd-group xml:lang="en">
    <title><italic>Keywords:</italic></title>
    <kwd>preschool teachers</kwd>
    <kwd>teacher behavior</kwd>
    <kwd>emotions</kwd>
    <kwd>multivariate analysis</kwd>
   </kwd-group>
   <kwd-group xml:lang="es">
    <title><italic>Palabras clave:</italic></title>
    <kwd>docentes de preescolar</kwd>
    <kwd>comportamiento del docente</kwd>
    <kwd>emociones</kwd>
    <kwd>análisis multivariado</kwd>
   </kwd-group>
   <counts>
    <fig-count count="2"/>
    <table-count count="3"/>
    <equation-count count="0"/>
    <ref-count count="45"/>
    
   </counts>
  </article-meta>
 </front>
 <body>
  <sec sec-type="intro">
   <title>I. Introduction</title>
   <p>Current trends in higher education have stressed the need for continuous improvement
    of formative processes through the progressive development of a range of
    competencies that prepare students to meet the challenges of their future career.
    Many of these competencies concern verbal communication and involve language skills
    that are considered a professional tool widely used in pedagogical settings, and in
    this sense, the teaching profession can be understood to require a complex set of
    cognitive and socio-affective skills, with language being the main vehicle by which
    they are conveyed. Teacher language is commonly studied under the theoretical
    concept of academic language, involving broad mastery of oral and written discourse
    through higher-order skills in grammatical, lexical, and discursive aspects of
    language (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B37">Schleppegrell, 2004</xref>). It is thus
    hoped that future professionals acquire, in their formative years, an adequate
    command of academic language that will form the groundwork for the use of more
    technical, applied language as necessary within their respective disciplines.</p>
   <p>Five decades of scientific research have documented this area of study by exploring
    the characteristics of and variations in teacher language, demonstrating a
    consistent link with quality of teaching practice (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B22"
     >Kalinowski et al., 2020</xref>) and a wide-ranging impact on students’
    cognitive processes, as teacher language strengthens, for example, abstract
    thinking, the production of new vocabulary and preferences for certain words (<xref
     ref-type="bibr" rid="B27">McNally et al., 2019</xref>). Early childhood
    education has not been left behind by these trends (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B4"
     >Campbell-Barr &amp; Bogatić, 2017</xref>), which shows that for early childhood
    educators, it is essential to acquire verbal skills that go beyond the mere command
    of non-academic language common to their immediate social environment.</p>
   <sec>
    <title>1.1 Emotions and words</title>
    <p>Various theories have been put forward to explain the relationship between words
     and emotions, revealing the complex functional representation they both have in
     the brain, distributed throughout different interrelated sensory, motor,
     affective and other language-related areas and networks in the brain (<xref
      ref-type="bibr" rid="B17">Hinojosa et al., 2019</xref>). Words can be
     understood as specific cognitive and neurophysiological markers serving to store
     an experience in a person’s conscience and/or retrieve the experience based on
     its significance and affective valence. For example, studies have reported how
     word choice is a good predictor of various psychophysical states (<xref
      ref-type="bibr" rid="B38">Shahane &amp; Denny, 2019</xref>). An
     emotion-related term or word is understood as a linguistic and communicative
     expression with an affective connotation that, from a structural perspective,
     should possess several distinctive features. According to <xref ref-type="bibr"
      rid="B15">Fontaine et al. (2013)</xref>, it should include (a) an appraisal
     component that triggers the emotion; (b) a distinctive tendency toward action;
     (c) facial movements and changes in tone of voice/speech; (d) observable body
     reactions; and (e) a subjective component. In words associated with an emotional
     experience, all these characteristics and/or properties converge with components
     of a cognitive, behavioral, and neurophysiological nature, and are often
     apparent as early as one’s first exposure to syllables, with an earlier and
     faster attentional bias for negative words (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B45">Yao
      et al., 2018</xref>). This evidence illustrates the intricate process that
     underpins the relationship between words and emotions, influencing sentence
     construction, verbalization and, ultimately, the meanings that subjects
     attribute to their own experience.</p>
   </sec>
   <sec>
    <title>1.2 Evidence-based characterizations of early childhood educators</title>
    <p>A fair amount of research has explored the characteristics of early childhood
     educators, reporting a range of dominant variables and other variables that
     present various degrees of association with quality of professional competence.
     For example, better academic credentials are associated with higher quality
     educational practices (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B24">Manning et al.,
      2019</xref>), and may in turn be further distinguished by type of academic
     training (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B30">Nasiopoulou et al., 2017</xref>), by
     degree of professional efficiency (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B18">Hu et al.,
      2018</xref>), by repertoire of emotional competencies (<xref ref-type="bibr"
      rid="B14">Fernández et al., 2019</xref>) and/or by theoretical preferences
     in explaining toddler behavior (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B28">Mischo et al.,
      2012</xref>). Other studies have identified educators’ professional
     competencies based on the country’s educational policies (<xref ref-type="bibr"
      rid="B31">Oberhuemer, 2015</xref>), socio-demographic variables (<xref
      ref-type="bibr" rid="B44">Unal &amp; Kurt, 2018</xref>), characteristics
     relating to their professional identity (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B12">Doğan
      &amp; Erdiller, 2016</xref>) and/or variables of a psychological nature such
     as the degree of emotional support provided to children (<xref ref-type="bibr"
      rid="B43">Treviño et al., 2013</xref>), attitudes toward early learning
      (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B20">Jeon et al., 2015</xref>), and personality
     traits (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B41">Tatalović et al., 2018</xref>). </p>
    <p>Meta-analyses of the use of language in early education settings have shown that
     trends have centered on exploring literacy and verbal skill development
     practices (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B25">Markussen-Brown et al., 2017</xref>)
     and have identified the crucial role played by educators’ verbal expertise in
     teaching and learning processes (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B21">Justice et al.,
      2018</xref>). In this vein, for example, emphasis has been placed on the
     impact of educators’ language on child language acquisition (<xref
      ref-type="bibr" rid="B29">Muhinyi &amp; Rowe, 2019</xref>), on the specific
     development of expressive language through play with infants (<xref
      ref-type="bibr" rid="B7">Cuellar &amp; Farkas, 2018</xref>), and/or on
     specific cognitive skills such as print concept, letter naming and/or
     phonological awareness (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B33">Piasta et al.,
      2019</xref>). In addition, recent studies have examined more specific
     properties of language and the impact of educator syntax on infants’ learning of
     new vocabulary (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B13">Farrow et al., 2020</xref>),
     vocabulary size, syntactical complexity and lexical diversity both of educators
     and infants (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B35">Pizarro et al., 2019</xref>), near
     and clear or far and unclear educator talk (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B11"
      >Degotardi et al., 2018</xref>), and/or preferences for storytelling and
     reading versus writing activities and their differential association with verbal
     syntactic complexity and the acquisition of new vocabulary (<xref
      ref-type="bibr" rid="B42">Torr, 2020</xref>). </p>
    <p>However, no recent evidence can be found beyond research on language in purely
     formal terms, with a small number of studies available having adopted other
     approaches to this subject. One example is a study of instructional and/or
     commanding language (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B18">Hu et al., 2018</xref>) and
     its unequivocal link to educators’ professional qualifications (<xref
      ref-type="bibr" rid="B19">Hu et al., 2017</xref>). Recent studies have also
     looked at a particular linguistic style among educators that tends to minimize
     infants’ emotional experience, discouraging the expression of emotions, with a
     detrimental effect on the development of socio-affective skills (<xref
      ref-type="bibr" rid="B23">King &amp; La Paro, 2018</xref>). On the other
     hand, evidence in this regard suggests that preschoolers adapt their exploratory
     strategies to the structure of the instruction provided by educators (<xref
      ref-type="bibr" rid="B36">Ruggeri et al., 2019</xref>) and, similarly,
     questions by educators about emotions have a regulating effect on infants’
     prosocial behavior and hence a far-reaching impact on lifelong social
     interactions (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B3">Brownell et al., 2012</xref>). All
     this evidence reflects an emerging interest in research on the characteristics
     of the language used by these professionals, under the umbrella of continuing
     improvements in the quality of teaching practice, pedagogical efficiency, and
     professional development.</p>
   </sec>
   <sec>
    <title>1.3 This study</title>
    <p>According to the Undersecretariat of Early Childhood Education (Subsecretaría de
     Educación Parvularia) in Chile, as of August 2020 and in the regions covered by
     this study (Atacama and Antofagasta), there were a total of 1,588 early
     childhood educators working in government-dependent schools, with many others
     working in private centers with official state accreditation. Despite clear
     deficiencies in regulatory policies regarding the formative process for these
     professionals (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B34">Pizarro &amp; Espinoza,
      2016</xref>), in recent years quality standards have been ensured through
     the creation of a single, comprehensive, far-reaching curricular directive
      (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B39">Subsecretaría de Educación Parvularia,
      2018</xref>). This curricular directive has established a series of
     technical and pedagogical guidelines involving professional skills that
     educators need to develop, such as using language within their discipline that
     is consistent with children’s changing development (<xref ref-type="bibr"
      rid="B40">Subsecretaría de Educación Parvularia, 2019</xref>). The relevance
     of these verbal skills and the recognition of the effect of semantic
     environments in shaping children’s thoughts, behaviors, social interactions, and
     emotions make explicitly clear the need to explore the characteristics of the
     language used by professionals working directly in early education settings. The
     socio-affective domain also being one of the cornerstones of formative processes
     in this section of the education system, this research aims to identify the
     characteristics, relevant dimensions and common uses of the speech of early
     childhood educators in their regular work environments (classroom and
     playground).</p>
    <p>This study explores the production of socio-affective words by early childhood
     educators based on the understanding that a lexical unit (a word) can be
     classified into different semantic categories of meaning. This raised three
     research questions: (1) Can differential distributions of semantic categories
     associated with the socio-affective domain be identified by their frequency of
     use? (2) Can differential distributions of semantic categories associated with
     the socio-affective domain be grouped into common linguistic profiles? (3) What
     are the best predictors of socio-affective word production?</p>
   </sec>
  </sec>
  <sec sec-type="methods">
   <title>II. Method</title>
   <p>
    <list list-type="simple">
     <list-item>
      <p>Design and participants. This descriptive, cross-sectional research
       adopted an exploratory approach within the framework of the paradigmatic
       dimension of functional linguistics, which claims that the meaning of
       words lies in a vast network of interrelated choices (<xref
        ref-type="bibr" rid="B16">Halliday, 2014</xref>). A total of 20
       early childhood educators, selected by convenience sampling,
       participated (all female; X̄ = 29.9 years of age; age range 21 - 40).
       These participants were from 14 different state and/or state-accredited
       educational institutions, all located in two nearby cities in northern
       Chile. All participants were native speakers of Spanish and held at
       least a four-year bachelor’s degree in early education, worked in the
       towns where the research was conducted at the time of the study, and had
       at least one year’s professional experience. In addition, no participant
       reported any disqualifying condition that may hinder the data collection
       and transcription process. The groups taught by the participants
       included three educational levels, with children aged from 24 to 60
       months.</p>
     </list-item>
     <list-item>
      <p>Instruments. The data was processed with the help of LIWC2015 v1.6 and
       its Spanish dictionary (Pennebaker Conglomerates, Inc.). This digital
       tool for psycholinguistic text analysis was the result of work by <xref
        ref-type="bibr" rid="B32">Pennebaker et al. (2015)</xref> and was
       developed on the premise that words from a text can be classified into
       linguistic categories of a grammatical and psychological nature,
       producing a profile for each individual text based on the percentage
       represented by each category in the base text. Its internal reliability
       (Cronbach’s alpha) ranges from .52 to .07, depending on the categories
       included.</p>
     </list-item>
     <list-item>
      <p>Study variables. This study examined a total of 62 variables, divided
       into two groups: (a) one group aimed at identifying general linguistic
       aspects (n = 18) and (b) a second group to categorize psychological and
       socio-affective properties of speech (n = 44; variables listed in <xref
        ref-type="table" rid="t1">Table 1</xref>). Each variable corresponds
       to a semantic category of meaning, and an algorithm is used to classify
       lexical units (words) based on the degree to which they pertain to
       different categories, constructed on the basis of normative studies and
       prior classifications. Although in many cases the definitions of these
       variables are self-explanatory, more information can be found in <xref
        ref-type="bibr" rid="B32">Pennebaker et al. (2015)</xref>.</p>
     </list-item>
     <list-item>
      <p>Procedure. Data was collected for each participant between 10 a.m. and 4
       p.m. for three to five non-consecutive days, over a total period of two
       to three weeks between August 2018 and January 2019. A continuous audio
       analysis method was employed due to its methodological advantages (<xref
        ref-type="bibr" rid="B8">Cunningham et al., 2019</xref>). This
       produced recordings varying in duration between 90 and 120 minutes,
       which included one or two regular teaching activities that responded to
       curricular standards applicable in the participants’ institutions and
       had a clear beginning, development, and conclusion. An attempt was made
       to ensure the recordings were not made on days with special activities
       that may alter the usual language employed (e.g. Mother’s Day, Month of
       the Sea, Christmas preparations). The final number of audio files and
       the variations in their duration were due to circumstances outside the
       researchers’ control (e.g. poor use of digital recorder and/or
       forgetfulness), so it was decided to establish a range of between 8 and
       10 hours’ duration for the recordings, and two participants were
       ultimately excluded on this criterion. The recordings were transcribed
       with the help of the application Live Transcribe for Android and the
       data was subsequently analyzed with SPSS 26.0 (IBM Corp., NY, USA). </p>
     </list-item>
     <list-item>
      <p>Data analysis. Various nonparametric tests were considered due to the
       characteristics and size of the sample. The descriptive analysis of
       lexical densities and general associations between variables included X
       , SD, quartiles, Spearman’s Rho (rs); z-scores, and effect sizes through
       Cohen’s d. Normal distributions were also calculated with the
       Shapiro-Wilk test, reliability was determined with Cronbach’s alpha, and
       a means comparison was performed with the independent samples t test.
       Possible clusters of similarly used words were defined in two steps:
       first, through a hierarchical cluster analysis to identify the number of
       resulting groupings, and then through a k-means algorithm to confirm
       them. The between-group and within-group significance of clusters was
       verified by the Kruskal-Wallis coefficient for one-way ANOVA. Lastly, a
       theoretical regression model was proposed to identify the best
       predictors of socio-affective word production.</p>
     </list-item>
     <list-item>
      <p>Ethical aspects. Initial meetings were held and a formal cover letter for
       the study was sent out. In some cases, permission to record was
       guaranteed by a preexisting scientific research agreement with the lead
       author’s institution. Signed consent forms were collected in all cases
       and the general guidelines of the American Psychological Association
       (APA) were followed.</p>
     </list-item>
    </list>
   </p>
  </sec>
  <sec sec-type="results">
   <title>III. Results</title>
   <sec>
    <title>3.1 Distribution of variables, bivariate correlations, and means
     comparison</title>
    <p>The total number of words compiled was 308 277 (X̄ = 15,413.85; SD = 8,455.38),
     through 190 hours of effective recording. The following descriptive statistics
     were obtained for the first group of variables (linguistic variables): total
     pronouns (X̄ = 12.13; SD = 1.08); personal pronouns (X̄ = 12.31; SD = .87);
     impersonal pronouns (X̄ = 8.9; SD = .82); first-person singular pronouns X̄=
     1.29; SD = .42); first-person plural pronouns (X̄ = .42; SD = .25);
     second-person pronouns (X̄= 1.54; SD = .44); third-person singular pronouns (X̄
     = 6.4; SD = .68); third-person plural pronouns (X̄= 1.85; SD = .37); verbs (X̄=
     3.41; SD = .67); verbs-first-person singular form (X̄ = 13.26; SD = 1.23);
     verbs-second-person form (X̄ = 1.44; SD = .33); verbs-first-person plural form
     (X̄ = 11.23; SD = 1.18); verbs-third-person singular form (X̄ = .01; SD = .01);
     verbs-third-person plural form (X̄ = 2.63; SD = .66); quantifiers (X̄ = .86; SD
     = .16); negations (X̄ = 1.85; SD = .54); numbers (X̄ = 1.71; SD = .28); formal
     language (X̄ = .13; SD = .09); informal language (X̄ = .89; SD = .4); and words
     of 6 or more letters (X̄ = .56; SD = .22).</p>
    <p>For the second group of variables, made up of affective processes, positive
     emotion, negative emotion, anger, anxiety, sadness, pleasure, social processes,
     family, friends, and human, the results are presented in <xref ref-type="table"
      rid="t1">Tables 1</xref> and <xref ref-type="table" rid="t2">2</xref>. The
     reliability test suggests an overall Cronbach’s alpha of .63 for all variables
     (n = 64; <italic>p</italic> ≤ .05), with a value of .55 for the variables
     exclusively related to general linguistic aspects (n = 20; <italic>p</italic> ≤
     .05), a value of .6 for all remaining variables excluding the socio-affective
     ones (n = 33; <italic>p</italic> ≤ .05), and .65 for the variables exclusively
     related to the socio-affective domain (n = 11; <italic>p</italic> ≤. 05).. The
     variable pleasure was included in the analysis due to its experiential proximity
     to the socio-affective domain, but not the variable sense due to the fact it
     referred solely to sensory pathways (e.g. watch, see, hear, touch). </p>
    <p>
     <table-wrap id="t1">
      <label>Table 1</label>
      <caption>
       <title>Descriptive statistics, normal distributions, and means
        comparisons</title>
      </caption>
      <table>
       <colgroup>
        <col/>
        <col/>
        <col/>
        <col/>
        <col/>
        <col/>
        <col/>
        <col/>
       </colgroup>
       <thead>
        <tr>
         <th align="center"> </th>
         <th align="center">X̄ (SD)</th>
         <th align="center">Q*</th>
         <th align="center">Shapiro-Wilk**</th>
         <th align="center"><italic>t</italic></th>
         <th align="center"> Sig. (2-tailed) ***</th>
         <th align="center">Skewness (SD = .51)</th>
         <th align="center">Kurtosis (SD = .99)</th>
        </tr>
       </thead>
       <tbody>
        <tr>
         <td align="left">Affective processes (1)</td>
         <td align="center">3.6(.63)</td>
         <td align="center">4</td>
         <td align="center">.52</td>
         <td align="center">25.55</td>
         <td align="center">.00</td>
         <td align="center">.57</td>
         <td align="center">.43</td>
        </tr>
        <tr>
         <td align="left">Positive emotion (2)</td>
         <td align="center">2.94(.54)</td>
         <td align="center">4</td>
         <td align="center">.25</td>
         <td align="center">24</td>
         <td align="center">.00</td>
         <td align="center">.29</td>
         <td align="center">-.99</td>
        </tr>
        <tr>
         <td align="left">Negative emotion (3)</td>
         <td align="center">.65(.32)</td>
         <td align="center">2</td>
         <td align="center">.00</td>
         <td align="center">8.83</td>
         <td align="center">.00</td>
         <td align="center">.84</td>
         <td align="center">-.68</td>
        </tr>
        <tr>
         <td align="left">Anger (4)</td>
         <td align="center">.24(.19)</td>
         <td align="center">1</td>
         <td align="center">.00</td>
         <td align="center">5.55</td>
         <td align="center">.00</td>
         <td align="center">1.27</td>
         <td align="center">.67</td>
        </tr>
        <tr>
         <td align="left">Anxiety (5)</td>
         <td align="center">.14(.09)</td>
         <td align="center">1</td>
         <td align="center">.46</td>
         <td align="center">6.85</td>
         <td align="center">.00</td>
         <td align="center">.23</td>
         <td align="center">-1.05</td>
        </tr>
        <tr>
         <td align="left">Sadness (6)</td>
         <td align="center">.14(.08)</td>
         <td align="center">1</td>
         <td align="center">.05</td>
         <td align="center">7.38</td>
         <td align="center">.00</td>
         <td align="center">.52</td>
         <td align="center">-1.1</td>
        </tr>
        <tr>
         <td align="left">Pleasure (7)</td>
         <td align="center">1.35(.43)</td>
         <td align="center">3</td>
         <td align="center">.95</td>
         <td align="center">13.96</td>
         <td align="center">.00</td>
         <td align="center">.01</td>
         <td align="center">.69</td>
        </tr>
        <tr>
         <td align="left">Social processes (8)</td>
         <td align="center">8.84(.73)</td>
         <td align="center">4</td>
         <td align="center">.11</td>
         <td align="center">53.48</td>
         <td align="center">.00</td>
         <td align="center">.76</td>
         <td align="center">2.52</td>
        </tr>
        <tr>
         <td align="left">Family (9)</td>
         <td align="center">.28(.14)</td>
         <td align="center">1</td>
         <td align="center">.02</td>
         <td align="center">8.8</td>
         <td align="center">.00</td>
         <td align="center">.91</td>
         <td align="center">-.08</td>
        </tr>
        <tr>
         <td align="left">Friends (10)</td>
         <td align="center">.29(.24)</td>
         <td align="center">1</td>
         <td align="center">.00</td>
         <td align="center">5.23</td>
         <td align="center">.00</td>
         <td align="center">1.42</td>
         <td align="center">1.63</td>
        </tr>
        <tr>
         <td align="left">Human (11)</td>
         <td align="center">.25(.17)</td>
         <td align="center">1</td>
         <td align="center">.03</td>
         <td align="center">6.37</td>
         <td align="center">.00</td>
         <td align="center">1.22</td>
         <td align="center">1.54</td>
        </tr>
        <tr>
         <td align="left">Cognitive processes (12)</td>
         <td align="center">15.67(1.87)</td>
         <td align="center">4</td>
         <td align="center">.8</td>
         <td align="center">37.37</td>
         <td align="center">.00</td>
         <td align="center">.06</td>
         <td align="center">-.44</td>
        </tr>
        <tr>
         <td align="left">Insight (13)</td>
         <td align="center">2.81(.7)</td>
         <td align="center">4</td>
         <td align="center">.00</td>
         <td align="center">17.77</td>
         <td align="center">.00</td>
         <td align="center">1.99</td>
         <td align="center">6.2</td>
        </tr>
        <tr>
         <td align="left">Causation (14)</td>
         <td align="center">1.33(.26)</td>
         <td align="center">3</td>
         <td align="center">.41</td>
         <td align="center">22.94</td>
         <td align="center">.00</td>
         <td align="center">-.61</td>
         <td align="center">.79</td>
        </tr>
        <tr>
         <td align="left">Discrepancy (15)</td>
         <td align="center">1.44(.29)</td>
         <td align="center">3</td>
         <td align="center">.48</td>
         <td align="center">21.58</td>
         <td align="center">.00</td>
         <td align="center">.56</td>
         <td align="center">1.5</td>
        </tr>
        <tr>
         <td align="left">Certainty (16)</td>
         <td align="center">1.16(.23)</td>
         <td align="center">3</td>
         <td align="center">.33</td>
         <td align="center">21.64</td>
         <td align="center">.00</td>
         <td align="center">.45</td>
         <td align="center">-.7</td>
        </tr>
        <tr>
         <td align="left">Tentative (17)</td>
         <td align="center">1.9(.37)</td>
         <td align="center">3</td>
         <td align="center">.67</td>
         <td align="center">22.85</td>
         <td align="center">.00</td>
         <td align="center">-.09</td>
         <td align="center">-.2</td>
        </tr>
        <tr>
         <td align="left">Relativity (18)</td>
         <td align="center">10.88(1.01)</td>
         <td align="center">4</td>
         <td align="center">.39</td>
         <td align="center">47.72</td>
         <td align="center">.00</td>
         <td align="center">-.16</td>
         <td align="center">-.26</td>
        </tr>
        <tr>
         <td align="left">Motion (19)</td>
         <td align="center">4.76(.75)</td>
         <td align="center">4</td>
         <td align="center">.9</td>
         <td align="center">28.36</td>
         <td align="center">.00</td>
         <td align="center">.34</td>
         <td align="center">.00</td>
        </tr>
        <tr>
         <td align="left">Time (20)</td>
         <td align="center">3.98(.63)</td>
         <td align="center">4</td>
         <td align="center">.18</td>
         <td align="center">28.2</td>
         <td align="center">.00</td>
         <td align="center">.39</td>
         <td align="center">-1.12</td>
        </tr>
        <tr>
         <td align="left">Space/Place (21)</td>
         <td align="center">2.7(.7)</td>
         <td align="center">3</td>
         <td align="center">.03</td>
         <td align="center">17.18</td>
         <td align="center">.00</td>
         <td align="center">1.18</td>
         <td align="center">1.01</td>
        </tr>
        <tr>
         <td align="left">Perceptual processes (22)</td>
         <td align="center">4.66(.75)</td>
         <td align="center">4</td>
         <td align="center">.02</td>
         <td align="center">27.79</td>
         <td align="center">.00</td>
         <td align="center">1.4</td>
         <td align="center">3.74</td>
        </tr>
        <tr>
         <td align="left">See (23)</td>
         <td align="center">2.23(.88)</td>
         <td align="center">3</td>
         <td align="center">.00</td>
         <td align="center">11.29</td>
         <td align="center">.00</td>
         <td align="center">2.72</td>
         <td align="center">9.17</td>
        </tr>
        <tr>
         <td align="left">Hear (24)</td>
         <td align="center">1.28(.32)</td>
         <td align="center">3</td>
         <td align="center">.35</td>
         <td align="center">17.54</td>
         <td align="center">.00</td>
         <td align="center">-.01</td>
         <td align="center">-.11</td>
        </tr>
        <tr>
         <td align="left">Sense (25)</td>
         <td align="center">1.07(.55)</td>
         <td align="center">2</td>
         <td align="center">.03</td>
         <td align="center">8.72</td>
         <td align="center">.00</td>
         <td align="center">.81</td>
         <td align="center">-.08</td>
        </tr>
        <tr>
         <td align="left">Biological processes (26)</td>
         <td align="center">2.46(.63)</td>
         <td align="center">3</td>
         <td align="center">.21</td>
         <td align="center">17.36</td>
         <td align="center">.00</td>
         <td align="center">.69</td>
         <td align="center">.13</td>
        </tr>
        <tr>
         <td align="left">Body (27)</td>
         <td align="center">1.17(.3)</td>
         <td align="center">3</td>
         <td align="center">.01</td>
         <td align="center">17.14</td>
         <td align="center">.00</td>
         <td align="center">1.05</td>
         <td align="center">.61</td>
        </tr>
        <tr>
         <td align="left">Health (28)</td>
         <td align="center">.15(.05)</td>
         <td align="center">1</td>
         <td align="center">.76</td>
         <td align="center">13.8</td>
         <td align="center">.00</td>
         <td align="center">-.31</td>
         <td align="center">-.27</td>
        </tr>
        <tr>
         <td align="left">Ingestion (29)</td>
         <td align="center">1.07(.45)</td>
         <td align="center">2</td>
         <td align="center">.3</td>
         <td align="center">10.49</td>
         <td align="center">.00</td>
         <td align="center">.3</td>
         <td align="center">-.88</td>
        </tr>
        <tr>
         <td align="left">Sexual (30)</td>
         <td align="center">.29(.17)</td>
         <td align="center">1</td>
         <td align="center">.00</td>
         <td align="center">7.29</td>
         <td align="center">.00</td>
         <td align="center">1.46</td>
         <td align="center">1.61</td>
        </tr>
        <tr>
         <td align="left">Other variables</td>
         <td align="center"> </td>
         <td align="center"> </td>
         <td align="center"> </td>
         <td align="center"> </td>
         <td align="center"> </td>
         <td align="center"> </td>
         <td align="center"> </td>
        </tr>
        <tr>
         <td align="left">Achievement (31)</td>
         <td align="center">.85(.32)</td>
         <td align="center">2</td>
         <td align="center">.22</td>
         <td align="center">11.92</td>
         <td align="center">.00</td>
         <td align="center">.24</td>
         <td align="center">1.35</td>
        </tr>
        <tr>
         <td align="left">Assent (32)</td>
         <td align="center">.85(.24)</td>
         <td align="center">2</td>
         <td align="center">.46</td>
         <td align="center">15.73</td>
         <td align="center">.00</td>
         <td align="center">.7</td>
         <td align="center">1.24</td>
        </tr>
        <tr>
         <td align="left">Exclusion (33)</td>
         <td align="center">2.06(.37)</td>
         <td align="center">3</td>
         <td align="center">.19</td>
         <td align="center">24.87</td>
         <td align="center">.00</td>
         <td align="center">.08</td>
         <td align="center">.44</td>
        </tr>
        <tr>
         <td align="left">Death (34)</td>
         <td align="center">.09(.07)</td>
         <td align="center">1</td>
         <td align="center">.02</td>
         <td align="center">5.83</td>
         <td align="center">.00</td>
         <td align="center">.87</td>
         <td align="center">-.21</td>
        </tr>
        <tr>
         <td align="left">Home (35)</td>
         <td align="center">.69(.23)</td>
         <td align="center">2</td>
         <td align="center">.97</td>
         <td align="center">13.41</td>
         <td align="center">.00</td>
         <td align="center">.4</td>
         <td align="center">.28</td>
        </tr>
        <tr>
         <td align="left">Inhibition (36)</td>
         <td align="center">.28(.1)</td>
         <td align="center">1</td>
         <td align="center">.34</td>
         <td align="center">12.93</td>
         <td align="center">.00</td>
         <td align="center">.61</td>
         <td align="center">1.02</td>
        </tr>
        <tr>
         <td align="left">Inclusion (37)</td>
         <td align="center">3.51(.54)</td>
         <td align="center">4</td>
         <td align="center">.21</td>
         <td align="center">29.06</td>
         <td align="center">.00</td>
         <td align="center">.6</td>
         <td align="center">.65</td>
        </tr>
        <tr>
         <td align="left">Money (38)</td>
         <td align="center">.33(.13)</td>
         <td align="center">2</td>
         <td align="center">.09</td>
         <td align="center">11.38</td>
         <td align="center">.00</td>
         <td align="center">3.34</td>
         <td align="center">.09</td>
        </tr>
        <tr>
         <td align="left">Nonfluencies (39)</td>
         <td align="center">.63(.2)</td>
         <td align="center">2</td>
         <td align="center">.52</td>
         <td align="center">13.9</td>
         <td align="center">.00</td>
         <td align="center">-.03</td>
         <td align="center">-1.05</td>
        </tr>
        <tr>
         <td align="left">Past (40)</td>
         <td align="center">1.69(.37)</td>
         <td align="center">3</td>
         <td align="center">.43</td>
         <td align="center">20.41</td>
         <td align="center">.00</td>
         <td align="center">.08</td>
         <td align="center">-.61</td>
        </tr>
        <tr>
         <td align="left">Present (41)</td>
         <td align="center">3.21(.43)</td>
         <td align="center">4</td>
         <td align="center">.39</td>
         <td align="center">33.29</td>
         <td align="center">.00</td>
         <td align="center">-.28</td>
         <td align="center">.56</td>
        </tr>
        <tr>
         <td align="left">Future (42)</td>
         <td align="center">.13(.21)</td>
         <td align="center">1</td>
         <td align="center">.54</td>
         <td align="center">23.37</td>
         <td align="center">.00</td>
         <td align="center">.07</td>
         <td align="center">-.66</td>
        </tr>
        <tr>
         <td align="left">Religion (43)</td>
         <td align="center">.09(.07)</td>
         <td align="center">1</td>
         <td align="center">.00</td>
         <td align="center">5.48</td>
         <td align="center">.00</td>
         <td align="center">1.39</td>
         <td align="center">.09</td>
        </tr>
        <tr>
         <td align="left">Work (44)</td>
         <td align="center">.99(.23)</td>
         <td align="center">2</td>
         <td align="center">.15</td>
         <td align="center">18.61</td>
         <td align="center">.00</td>
         <td align="center">-.05</td>
         <td align="center">-.07</td>
        </tr>
       </tbody>
      </table>
      <table-wrap-foot>
       <fn id="TFN1">
        <p>Note: *Quartiles from highest (4) to lowest (1).</p>
       </fn>
       <fn id="TFN2">
        <p>*<italic>p</italic> ≤ .05 ***<italic>p</italic> ≤ .01</p>
       </fn>
      </table-wrap-foot>
     </table-wrap>
    </p>
    <p>
     <table-wrap id="t2">
      <label>Table 2</label>
      <caption>
       <title>Bivariate correlations </title>
      </caption>
      <table>
       <colgroup>
        <col/>
        <col/>
        <col/>
        <col/>
        <col/>
        <col/>
        <col/>
        <col/>
        <col/>
        <col/>
        <col/>
        <col/>
       </colgroup>
       <thead>
        <tr>
         <th align="left">(rs)</th>
         <th align="center">1</th>
         <th align="center">2</th>
         <th align="center">3</th>
         <th align="center">4</th>
         <th align="center">5</th>
         <th align="center">6</th>
         <th align="center">7</th>
         <th align="center">8</th>
         <th align="center">9</th>
         <th align="center">10</th>
         <th align="center">11</th>
        </tr>
       </thead>
       <tbody>
        <tr>
         <td align="left">(1)</td>
         <td align="center">1</td>
         <td align="center">.77**</td>
         <td align="center">.53*</td>
         <td align="center">.41</td>
         <td align="center">.44*</td>
         <td align="center">.27</td>
         <td align="center">.29</td>
         <td align="center">.00</td>
         <td align="center">.4</td>
         <td align="center">.3</td>
         <td align="center">.06</td>
        </tr>
        <tr>
         <td align="left">(2)</td>
         <td align="center"> </td>
         <td align="center">1</td>
         <td align="center">-.02</td>
         <td align="center">-.06</td>
         <td align="center">-.1</td>
         <td align="center">-.03</td>
         <td align="center">.29</td>
         <td align="center">-.13</td>
         <td align="center">.22</td>
         <td align="center">.28</td>
         <td align="center">-.22</td>
        </tr>
        <tr>
         <td align="left">(3)</td>
         <td align="center"> </td>
         <td align="center"> </td>
         <td align="center">1</td>
         <td align="center">.73**</td>
         <td align="center">.87**</td>
         <td align="center">-.03</td>
         <td align="center">.29</td>
         <td align="center">.15</td>
         <td align="center">.31</td>
         <td align="center">.18</td>
         <td align="center">.38</td>
        </tr>
        <tr>
         <td align="left">(4)</td>
         <td align="center"> </td>
         <td align="center"> </td>
         <td align="center"> </td>
         <td align="center">1</td>
         <td align="center">.64**</td>
         <td align="center">.34</td>
         <td align="center">.38</td>
         <td align="center">.02</td>
         <td align="center">.24</td>
         <td align="center">.05</td>
         <td align="center">.47*</td>
        </tr>
        <tr>
         <td align="left">(5)</td>
         <td align="center"> </td>
         <td align="center"> </td>
         <td align="center"> </td>
         <td align="center"> </td>
         <td align="center">1</td>
         <td align="center">.57**</td>
         <td align="center">.1</td>
         <td align="center">.05</td>
         <td align="center">.18</td>
         <td align="center">.16</td>
         <td align="center">.37</td>
        </tr>
        <tr>
         <td align="left">(6)</td>
         <td align="center"> </td>
         <td align="center"> </td>
         <td align="center"> </td>
         <td align="center"> </td>
         <td align="center"> </td>
         <td align="center">1</td>
         <td align="center">.18</td>
         <td align="center">.13</td>
         <td align="center">-.01</td>
         <td align="center">.07</td>
         <td align="center">.03</td>
        </tr>
        <tr>
         <td align="left">(7)</td>
         <td align="center"> </td>
         <td align="center"> </td>
         <td align="center"> </td>
         <td align="center"> </td>
         <td align="center"> </td>
         <td align="center"> </td>
         <td align="center">1</td>
         <td align="center">.21</td>
         <td align="center">.06</td>
         <td align="center">.51*</td>
         <td align="center">-.00</td>
        </tr>
        <tr>
         <td align="left">(12)</td>
         <td align="center">-.43</td>
         <td align="center">-.1</td>
         <td align="center">-.35</td>
         <td align="center">-.29</td>
         <td align="center">-.43</td>
         <td align="center">-.11</td>
         <td align="center">.51*</td>
         <td align="center">-.04</td>
         <td align="center">-.27</td>
         <td align="center">-.26</td>
         <td align="center">-.1</td>
        </tr>
        <tr>
         <td align="left">(13)</td>
         <td align="center">-.1</td>
         <td align="center">-.02</td>
         <td align="center">-.02</td>
         <td align="center">-.04</td>
         <td align="center">-.09</td>
         <td align="center">.12</td>
         <td align="center">.06</td>
         <td align="center">.13</td>
         <td align="center">-.18</td>
         <td align="center">.05</td>
         <td align="center">-.06</td>
        </tr>
        <tr>
         <td align="left">(14)</td>
         <td align="center">-.32</td>
         <td align="center">-.23</td>
         <td align="center">-.07</td>
         <td align="center">-.06</td>
         <td align="center">-.1</td>
         <td align="center">.07</td>
         <td align="center">.06</td>
         <td align="center">-.08</td>
         <td align="center">-.35</td>
         <td align="center">-.17</td>
         <td align="center">-.04</td>
        </tr>
        <tr>
         <td align="left">(15)</td>
         <td align="center">-.36</td>
         <td align="center">-.26</td>
         <td align="center">-08</td>
         <td align="center">-.19</td>
         <td align="center">-.13</td>
         <td align="center">.15</td>
         <td align="center">-.00</td>
         <td align="center">-.18</td>
         <td align="center">-.35</td>
         <td align="center">-.58**</td>
         <td align="center">-.22</td>
        </tr>
        <tr>
         <td align="left">(16)</td>
         <td align="center">-.09</td>
         <td align="center">.14</td>
         <td align="center">-.46*</td>
         <td align="center">-.28</td>
         <td align="center">-.42</td>
         <td align="center">-.63**</td>
         <td align="center">-.16</td>
         <td align="center">.05</td>
         <td align="center">.11</td>
         <td align="center">.12</td>
         <td align="center">.1</td>
        </tr>
        <tr>
         <td align="left">(17)</td>
         <td align="center">-.37</td>
         <td align="center">-.26</td>
         <td align="center">-.16</td>
         <td align="center">-.25</td>
         <td align="center">-.15</td>
         <td align="center">.14</td>
         <td align="center">-.26</td>
         <td align="center">.09</td>
         <td align="center">-.25</td>
         <td align="center">-.5*</td>
         <td align="center">-.2</td>
        </tr>
        <tr>
         <td align="left">(18)</td>
         <td align="center">-.08</td>
         <td align="center">.27</td>
         <td align="center">-.33</td>
         <td align="center">-.51</td>
         <td align="center">-.32</td>
         <td align="center">-.26</td>
         <td align="center">.51*</td>
         <td align="center">-.24</td>
         <td align="center">-.25</td>
         <td align="center">.08</td>
         <td align="center">-.49*</td>
        </tr>
        <tr>
         <td align="left">(19)</td>
         <td align="center">.12</td>
         <td align="center">.38</td>
         <td align="center">-.2</td>
         <td align="center">-.47*</td>
         <td align="center">-.25</td>
         <td align="center">.03</td>
         <td align="center">.08</td>
         <td align="center">-.18</td>
         <td align="center">-.23</td>
         <td align="center">-.1</td>
         <td align="center">-.68**</td>
        </tr>
        <tr>
         <td align="left">(20)</td>
         <td align="center">-.04</td>
         <td align="center">.12</td>
         <td align="center">-.22</td>
         <td align="center">-.28</td>
         <td align="center">-.16</td>
         <td align="center">-.35</td>
         <td align="center">-.36</td>
         <td align="center">.05</td>
         <td align="center">.23</td>
         <td align="center">.19</td>
         <td align="center">.26</td>
        </tr>
        <tr>
         <td align="left">(21)</td>
         <td align="center">.49*</td>
         <td align="center">-.31</td>
         <td align="center">-.14</td>
         <td align="center">-.15</td>
         <td align="center">-.13</td>
         <td align="center">-.15</td>
         <td align="center">.02</td>
         <td align="center">-.18</td>
         <td align="center">-.19</td>
         <td align="center">-.01</td>
         <td align="center">-.04</td>
        </tr>
        <tr>
         <td align="left">(22)</td>
         <td align="center">.03</td>
         <td align="center">.04</td>
         <td align="center">.06</td>
         <td align="center">.15</td>
         <td align="center">-.11</td>
         <td align="center">.01</td>
         <td align="center">.21</td>
         <td align="center">.16</td>
         <td align="center">-.17</td>
         <td align="center">.25</td>
         <td align="center">-.08</td>
        </tr>
        <tr>
         <td align="left">(23)</td>
         <td align="center">.41</td>
         <td align="center">.42</td>
         <td align="center">.13</td>
         <td align="center">.08</td>
         <td align="center">.04</td>
         <td align="center">.08</td>
         <td align="center">.07</td>
         <td align="center">-.24</td>
         <td align="center">-17</td>
         <td align="center">.03</td>
         <td align="center">-.16</td>
        </tr>
        <tr>
         <td align="left">(24)</td>
         <td align="center">-.55*</td>
         <td align="center">-.68**</td>
         <td align="center">-.04</td>
         <td align="center">.44</td>
         <td align="center">-.09</td>
         <td align="center">.07</td>
         <td align="center">.08</td>
         <td align="center">.39</td>
         <td align="center">.03</td>
         <td align="center">-.03</td>
         <td align="center">.38</td>
        </tr>
        <tr>
         <td align="left">(25)</td>
         <td align="center">.24</td>
         <td align="center">.23</td>
         <td align="center">.14</td>
         <td align="center">.25</td>
         <td align="center">.05</td>
         <td align="center">-.08</td>
         <td align="center">.58**</td>
         <td align="center">.22</td>
         <td align="center">.11</td>
         <td align="center">.49*</td>
         <td align="center">.1</td>
        </tr>
        <tr>
         <td align="left">(26)</td>
         <td align="center">.58**</td>
         <td align="center">.36</td>
         <td align="center">.28</td>
         <td align="center">.45*</td>
         <td align="center">.19</td>
         <td align="center">.03</td>
         <td align="center">.22</td>
         <td align="center">-.01</td>
         <td align="center">.15</td>
         <td align="center">-.1</td>
         <td align="center">-.11</td>
        </tr>
        <tr>
         <td align="left">(27)</td>
         <td align="center">.31</td>
         <td align="center">.19</td>
         <td align="center">.3</td>
         <td align="center">.26</td>
         <td align="center">.26</td>
         <td align="center">.02</td>
         <td align="center">.5*</td>
         <td align="center">-.03</td>
         <td align="center">.03</td>
         <td align="center">.35</td>
         <td align="center">-.1</td>
        </tr>
        <tr>
         <td align="left">(28)</td>
         <td align="center">.31</td>
         <td align="center">.03</td>
         <td align="center">.24</td>
         <td align="center">.17</td>
         <td align="center">.41</td>
         <td align="center">.02</td>
         <td align="center">.33</td>
         <td align="center">-.04</td>
         <td align="center">.03</td>
         <td align="center">-.12</td>
         <td align="center">.2</td>
        </tr>
        <tr>
         <td align="left">(29)</td>
         <td align="center">.35</td>
         <td align="center">.25</td>
         <td align="center">-.00</td>
         <td align="center">.27</td>
         <td align="center">-.05</td>
         <td align="center">-.1</td>
         <td align="center">-.00</td>
         <td align="center">-.04</td>
         <td align="center">-.01</td>
         <td align="center">-.43</td>
         <td align="center">-.24</td>
        </tr>
        <tr>
         <td align="left">(30)</td>
         <td align="center">.41</td>
         <td align="center">.33</td>
         <td align="center">.42</td>
         <td align="center">.18</td>
         <td align="center">.23</td>
         <td align="center">.32</td>
         <td align="center">.31</td>
         <td align="center">.31</td>
         <td align="center">.48*</td>
         <td align="center">.55*</td>
         <td align="center">.39</td>
        </tr>
        <tr>
         <td align="left">(31)</td>
         <td align="center">-.22</td>
         <td align="center">.15</td>
         <td align="center">-.39</td>
         <td align="center">-.47*</td>
         <td align="center">-.49*</td>
         <td align="center">-.03</td>
         <td align="center">-.34</td>
         <td align="center">-.08</td>
         <td align="center">-.12</td>
         <td align="center">-.37</td>
         <td align="center">-.35</td>
        </tr>
        <tr>
         <td align="left">(32)</td>
         <td align="center">.01</td>
         <td align="center">.43</td>
         <td align="center">-.64**</td>
         <td align="center">-.52*</td>
         <td align="center">-.6**</td>
         <td align="center">-.61**</td>
         <td align="center">-.17</td>
         <td align="center">-.5*</td>
         <td align="center">.11</td>
         <td align="center">.06</td>
         <td align="center">-.35</td>
        </tr>
        <tr>
         <td align="left">(33)</td>
         <td align="center">-.11</td>
         <td align="center">.09</td>
         <td align="center">-.12</td>
         <td align="center">-08</td>
         <td align="center">-.27</td>
         <td align="center">.1</td>
         <td align="center">-.08</td>
         <td align="center">.28</td>
         <td align="center">.06</td>
         <td align="center">-.16</td>
         <td align="center">.07</td>
        </tr>
        <tr>
         <td align="left">(34)</td>
         <td align="center">.02</td>
         <td align="center">.09</td>
         <td align="center">.02</td>
         <td align="center">-.04</td>
         <td align="center">-.03</td>
         <td align="center">.15</td>
         <td align="center">-.05</td>
         <td align="center">-.15</td>
         <td align="center">-.31</td>
         <td align="center">-.21</td>
         <td align="center">-.27</td>
        </tr>
        <tr>
         <td align="left">(35)</td>
         <td align="center">-.16</td>
         <td align="center">-.09</td>
         <td align="center">-.19</td>
         <td align="center">-.01</td>
         <td align="center">-.16</td>
         <td align="center">-.1</td>
         <td align="center">-.52*</td>
         <td align="center">-.48*</td>
         <td align="center">-.22</td>
         <td align="center">-.51*</td>
         <td align="center">.04</td>
        </tr>
        <tr>
         <td align="left">(36)</td>
         <td align="center">.00</td>
         <td align="center">.14</td>
         <td align="center">-.16</td>
         <td align="center">.05</td>
         <td align="center">-.04</td>
         <td align="center">-.23</td>
         <td align="center">-.02</td>
         <td align="center">-.4</td>
         <td align="center">-.16</td>
         <td align="center">-.26</td>
         <td align="center">-.01</td>
        </tr>
        <tr>
         <td align="left">(37)</td>
         <td align="center">-.38</td>
         <td align="center">-.08</td>
         <td align="center">-.28</td>
         <td align="center">-.31</td>
         <td align="center">-.26</td>
         <td align="center">-.07</td>
         <td align="center">.07</td>
         <td align="center">.07</td>
         <td align="center">.05</td>
         <td align="center">.12</td>
         <td align="center">.07</td>
        </tr>
        <tr>
         <td align="left">(38)</td>
         <td align="center">-.27</td>
         <td align="center">-.04</td>
         <td align="center">-.37</td>
         <td align="center">.24</td>
         <td align="center">-.32</td>
         <td align="center">-.00</td>
         <td align="center">.38</td>
         <td align="center">.25</td>
         <td align="center">.42</td>
         <td align="center">.12</td>
         <td align="center">.55</td>
        </tr>
        <tr>
         <td align="left">(39)</td>
         <td align="center">.24</td>
         <td align="center">-.09</td>
         <td align="center">.35</td>
         <td align="center">.43</td>
         <td align="center">.32</td>
         <td align="center">-.00</td>
         <td align="center">.08</td>
         <td align="center">.08</td>
         <td align="center">.19</td>
         <td align="center">-.16</td>
         <td align="center">.06</td>
        </tr>
        <tr>
         <td align="left">(40)</td>
         <td align="center">.13</td>
         <td align="center">.6**</td>
         <td align="center">-.37</td>
         <td align="center">-.48*</td>
         <td align="center">-.39</td>
         <td align="center">-.1</td>
         <td align="center">.03</td>
         <td align="center">-.38</td>
         <td align="center">-.19</td>
         <td align="center">.15</td>
         <td align="center">-.54*</td>
        </tr>
        <tr>
         <td align="left">(41)</td>
         <td align="center">-.13</td>
         <td align="center">-.27</td>
         <td align="center">.17</td>
         <td align="center">.33</td>
         <td align="center">.2</td>
         <td align="center">.29</td>
         <td align="center">.06</td>
         <td align="center">-.06</td>
         <td align="center">-.25</td>
         <td align="center">-.32</td>
         <td align="center">.11</td>
        </tr>
        <tr>
         <td align="left">(42)</td>
         <td align="center">-.27</td>
         <td align="center">-.33</td>
         <td align="center">.21</td>
         <td align="center">.17</td>
         <td align="center">.11</td>
         <td align="center">.17</td>
         <td align="center">.13</td>
         <td align="center">.26</td>
         <td align="center">-.13</td>
         <td align="center">-.05</td>
         <td align="center">.01</td>
        </tr>
        <tr>
         <td align="left">(43)</td>
         <td align="center">-.05</td>
         <td align="center">-.13</td>
         <td align="center">-.08</td>
         <td align="center">.29</td>
         <td align="center">-.05</td>
         <td align="center">-.56**</td>
         <td align="center">.19</td>
         <td align="center">.08</td>
         <td align="center">.28</td>
         <td align="center">.24</td>
         <td align="center">.08</td>
        </tr>
        <tr>
         <td align="left">(44)</td>
         <td align="center">.39</td>
         <td align="center">.36</td>
         <td align="center">.27</td>
         <td align="center">.18</td>
         <td align="center">.21</td>
         <td align="center">.02</td>
         <td align="center">.14</td>
         <td align="center">.35</td>
         <td align="center">.59**</td>
         <td align="center">.08</td>
         <td align="center">.46*</td>
        </tr>
       </tbody>
      </table>
      <table-wrap-foot>
       <fn id="TFN3">
        <p>Note: * <italic>p</italic> ≤ .05</p>
       </fn>
       <fn id="TFN4">
        <p>** <italic>p</italic> ≤ .01</p>
       </fn>
      </table-wrap-foot>
     </table-wrap>
    </p>
    <p>Bivariate correlations between the variables of the second group were also
     reviewed using the two-tailed Spearman’s rank correlation coefficient (rs).
     However, due to space limitations, the following table presents only
     associations in the socio-affective domain. The numbers are given in the same
     order as in <xref ref-type="table" rid="t1">Table 1</xref>.</p>
    <p>Other significant correlations worthy of mention (<italic>p</italic> ≤ .01) are
     informal language / inclusion (-.72), discrepancy / tentative (.79), sense /
     money (.82), and body / money (-.7).</p>
   </sec>
   <sec>
    <title>3.2 Cluster analysis</title>
    <p>To continue our analysis, we explored the possibility of identifying common
     profiles of semantic categories associated exclusively with the socio-affective
     domain, based on their degree of convergence and statistical differentiation.
     After standardization of the 11 variables, two steps were followed to group the
     variables. Firstly, an agglomerative hierarchical cluster analysis was applied
     to determine the best possible grouping of the observations (variables) included
     in the model (n = 11). This was done by building a hierarchy of observations
     that are then merged as they move up the hierarchy. For this, the algorithm
     employed a measure of the squared Euclidean distance. These results are
     presented in the following <xref ref-type="fig" rid="f1">dendrogram</xref>:</p>
    <p>
     <fig id="f1">
      <label>Figure 1</label>
      <caption>
       <title>Dendrogram using average linkage between groups by
        socio-affective variable</title>
      </caption>
      <graphic xlink:href="1607-4041-redie-23-e21-gf1.jpg"/>
     </fig>
    </p>
    <p>Secondly, a k-means algorithm was applied to confirm the emergent clusters and
     determine their best predictors, specific distributions, and statistical
     significance. The Kruskal-Wallis coefficient indicates significant results for
     the mean centers of affective processes, negative emotion, anger, anxiety, and
     sadness, and a post hoc analysis using Cohen’s d confirmed these differences for
     anxiety, affective processes, sadness, and anger, with high, moderate, and low
     effect sizes (see <xref ref-type="table" rid="t3">Table 3</xref>).</p>
    <p>
     <table-wrap id="t3">
      <label>Table 3</label>
      <caption>
       <title>Cluster centers and internal predictors determined by k-means
        algorithm</title>
      </caption>
      <table>
       <colgroup>
        <col/>
        <col span="2"/>
        <col span="2"/>
        <col/>
       </colgroup>
       <thead>
        <tr>
         <th align="justify"> </th>
         <th align="center" colspan="2">Cluster centers* (z-scores) </th>
         <th align="center" colspan="2">Kruskal-Wallis </th>
         <th align="center"> </th>
        </tr>
        <tr>
         <th align="justify"> </th>
         <th align="center">1 (n=13)</th>
         <th align="center">2 (n=7)</th>
         <th align="center">Test statistic</th>
         <th align="center">Asymp. Sig.</th>
         <th align="center"><bold>Cohen’s <italic>d</italic>
          </bold></th>
        </tr>
       </thead>
       <tbody>
        <tr>
         <td align="left">Affective processes</td>
         <td align="center">4(-.35)</td>
         <td align="center">3.35(.65)</td>
         <td align="center">3.62</td>
         <td align="center">.05</td>
         <td align="center">1.11</td>
        </tr>
        <tr>
         <td align="left">Positive emotion</td>
         <td align="center">3.29(-.02)</td>
         <td align="center">2.71(.05)</td>
         <td align="center">.00</td>
         <td align="center">8.37</td>
         <td align="center">-</td>
        </tr>
        <tr>
         <td align="left">Negative emotion</td>
         <td align="center">.57(-.53)</td>
         <td align="center">.46(.98)</td>
         <td align="center">8.37</td>
         <td align="center">.00</td>
         <td align="center">.51</td>
        </tr>
        <tr>
         <td align="left">Anger</td>
         <td align="center">.22(-.49)</td>
         <td align="center">.07(.92)</td>
         <td align="center">6.45</td>
         <td align="center">.01</td>
         <td align="center">.24</td>
        </tr>
        <tr>
         <td align="left">Anxiety </td>
         <td align="center">.21(-.48)</td>
         <td align="center">.11(.89)</td>
         <td align="center">8.38</td>
         <td align="center">.00</td>
         <td align="center">1.62</td>
        </tr>
        <tr>
         <td align="left">Sadness</td>
         <td align="center">.08(-.46)</td>
         <td align="center">.26(.86)</td>
         <td align="center">7.28</td>
         <td align="center">.00</td>
         <td align="center">.58</td>
        </tr>
        <tr>
         <td align="left">Pleasure</td>
         <td align="center">1.02(-.19)</td>
         <td align="center">1.32(.35)</td>
         <td align="center">1.92</td>
         <td align="center">.16</td>
         <td align="center">-</td>
        </tr>
        <tr>
         <td align="left">Social processes</td>
         <td align="center">7.42(-.05)</td>
         <td align="center">10.91(.09)</td>
         <td align="center">.26</td>
         <td align="center">.6</td>
         <td align="center">-</td>
        </tr>
        <tr>
         <td align="left">Family </td>
         <td align="center">.31(-.25)</td>
         <td align="center">.44(.47)</td>
         <td align="center">1.51</td>
         <td align="center">.21</td>
         <td align="center">-</td>
        </tr>
        <tr>
         <td align="left">Friends</td>
         <td align="center">.35(-.33)</td>
         <td align="center">.95(.62)</td>
         <td align="center">2.39</td>
         <td align="center">.12</td>
         <td align="center">-</td>
        </tr>
        <tr>
         <td align="left">Human </td>
         <td align="center">.74(-.31)</td>
         <td align="center">.28(.58)</td>
         <td align="center">2.27</td>
         <td align="center">.13</td>
         <td align="center">-</td>
        </tr>
       </tbody>
      </table>
      <table-wrap-foot>
       <fn id="TFN5">
        <p>Note: * The final variance ratio between cluster centers is
         3.4</p>
       </fn>
      </table-wrap-foot>
     </table-wrap>
    </p>
    <p>Thus the groups initially observed were confirmed, revealing the presence of two
     main clusters, one predominant (cluster 1; n = 13; 65%), and another smaller one
     (cluster 2; n = 7; 35%). Furthermore, high homogeneity was observed in the
     distribution of variables for both groups, with a high density of words
     associated with the general categories of social processes and affective
     processes, and then, in particular, the subcategory positive emotion. By
     contrast, a low density was observed in the scores for negative emotion, so
     anger, anxiety, and sadness, as well as for human. The variable pleasure
     exhibits average values in both groups. <xref ref-type="fig" rid="f2">Figure
      2</xref> shows the similarities and differences between the predictors of
     the clusters in z-scores:</p>
    <p>
     <fig id="f2">
      <label>Figure 2</label>
      <caption>
       <title>Distribution of predictors of clusters of socio-affective
        variables</title>
      </caption>
      <graphic xlink:href="1607-4041-redie-23-e21-gf2.png"/>
     </fig>
    </p>
   </sec>
   <sec>
    <title>3.3 Predictors of socio-affective words</title>
    <p>A multiple regression model was constructed to explore the trends in the data and
     identify the best predictors for the second set of variables that would be
     strictly consistent with the assumptions for this type of statistics:
     multicollinearity, homoscedasticity, means and normal distributions of
     residuals, and the absence of cases that skew the data. After verifying that all
     these criteria were met and without removing any outlier (all Cook’s distances
     were below 1), 15 independent variables were entered in the final steps of the
     model using the stepwise method. Due to the large number of variables, it was
     decided to report only two of the resulting predictors: (1) The best predictors
     of the social processes category are exclusion and friends [F10.37,
      <italic>p</italic> &lt; .00; R2change = .32; with a multicollinearity test
     (VIF) of 1.06 and a Durbin-Watson (DW) coefficient of 2.53]. (2) The category
     family is predicted by sexual (exemplified by words like “lips”, “love”, “pure”,
     and “kisses”) and by causation [F12.48, <italic>p</italic> &lt; .00; R2change =
     .11; VIF of 1; DW of 2.03]. (3) The category friends is predicted by family and
     ingestion [F11.25, <italic>p</italic> &lt; .00; R2change = .15; VIF of 1; DW of
     2.55]. (4) The category human is predicted by motion and family [F14.75,
      <italic>p</italic> &lt; .00; R2change = .2; VIF of 1.04; DW of 2.45]. (5)
     The general category affective processes is predicted by positive emotion and
     negative emotion [F177.04, <italic>p</italic> &lt; .00; R2change = .3; VIF of 1;
     DW of 2.21]. In turn, (6) positive emotion is predicted by the general category
     affective processes and the subcategory negative emotion [F126.89,
      <italic>p</italic> &lt; .00; R2change = .28; VIF of 1.37; DW of 2.33]. (7)
     Negative emotion is predicted by anger and anxiety [F133.63, <italic>p</italic>
     &lt; .00; R2change = .11; VIF of 1.2; DW of 2.07]. (8) Anger is predicted by
     negative emotion and sadness [F82.93, <italic>p</italic> &lt; .00; R2change =
     .08; VIF of 1.87; DW of 2.09]. (9) Anxiety is predicted by negative emotion and
     health [F30.83, <italic>p</italic> &lt; .00; R2change = .08; VIF of 1.09; DW of
     2.11]. (10) Sadness is predicted by negative emotion and anger [F21.22,
      <italic>p</italic> &lt; .00; R2change = .24; VIF of 5.78; DW of 1.94]. And
     (11) pleasure is predicted by body [F14.03, <italic>p</italic> &lt; .00;
     R2change = .43, VIF of 1; DW of 2.4].</p>
   </sec>
  </sec>
  <sec sec-type="discussion">
   <title>IV. Discussion</title>
   <sec>
    <title>4.1 Predominant semantic categories (research question no. 1)</title>
    <p>A first glance at the data shows distinctive distributions of words associated
     with formal aspects of language. Of particular note is the use of (a) the
     present tense over the past or future; (b) personal pronouns over impersonal
     ones; (c) pronouns in the second-person singular over first-person pronouns; (d)
     formal language over informal language; (e) a greater presence of verbs in the
     second-person form (you); and (f) substantial negation. Next in the analysis, 23
     semantic categories stand out for their high or low lexical density in the
     fourth and first quartiles respectively (<xref ref-type="table" rid="t1">Table
      1</xref>). The first research question has thus been answered in the
     affirmative, considering the differential distributions of semantic categories
     that were indeed identified.</p>
    <p>The highest lexical density was attained by the general variable cognitive
     processes, headed by the subcategory insight and exemplified by words like
     “understand”, “realize”, “make”, and “solution”. These findings can be
     understood within the context of daily discipline-specific language in early
     education settings, which are characterized by a wealth of scenarios that demand
     clear, precise instructions, together with countless warnings and reprimands in
     response to ongoing unexpected situations. This may be indicative of an
     oversaturation of words that require an understanding and quick judgment on the
     part of preschoolers. In addition, these observations shed some light on the
     specific role played by educational interventions that may have an impact on the
     development of behavioral self-regulation skills among toddlers, as has been
     suggested by <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B1">Bendezú et al. (2017)</xref>. </p>
    <p>The second densest category is relativity, exemplified by words such as “high”,
     “low”, “full”, and “up to”, and particularly the subcategory motion, exemplified
     by words such as “bring”, “path”, and “go”, all of which emphasize the here and
     now of the educational environment. These findings complement the above
     discussion on the efforts made by educators to raise awareness of and alert to
     the educational setting and the boundaries by which it is defined, opening up an
     interesting hypothesis regarding which linguistic features promote the
     above-mentioned behavioral self-regulation skills in preschoolers, particularly
     inhibitory control of behavior. </p>
    <p>The third semantic category noted for its lexical density is that of social
     processes, which reflects a use of language to be expected in this educational
     context. Similarly, the general category perceptual processes was highly
     present, and within this category, the subcategory see was the mechanism of
     perception most often referred to by educators, who continually instructed
     children to be alert to what was happening in the learning environment. Examples
     of lexical units in this category include verbs like “see”, “look (at)”, and
     “show”, but also nouns such as “arch” or “picture”. This can be linked to the
     role of instructional language and the generation of meaning in early education
     settings, recently noted by <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B2">Brown et al.
      (2020)</xref>, through which educators frame the educational situation,
     constantly noting behaviors and directing actions. Lastly, the category
     inclusion achieved a high rank in the distributions observed, and is illustrated
     by lexical units such as “put it away”, “wait”, “hang on”, and
     “responsible”.</p>
    <p>A further substantial number of categories were poorly represented in the general
     mosaic of results, in particular those relating to emotions. Given that these
     findings cannot be contextualized due to the lack of any comparative element,
     they should be treated with caution. One good example is the apparent
     contradiction between what <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B6">Cekaite and Bergnehr
      (2018)</xref> have stressed as the crucial role of language associated with
     corporeality in teaching and the low lexical densities found in the category
     biological processes and the subcategory body. Moreover, manually transcribing
     the audio recordings provided us with a range of field observations regarding
     the lack of variety in the production of socio-affective words. Indeed, this
     specific professional context calls for a simple lexis consistent with the
     developmental tasks undertaken by children at an early age. Nonetheless, for
     children, the lack of greater lexical complexity may also constitute a
     limitation as they strive to align their emerging feelings against the
     linguistic backdrop at their disposal and provided by educators. The progressive
     nature of language development in the early years of life requires a rich
     vocabulary able to meet the educational demands of children, as asserted by
      <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B9">Dalgren (2016)</xref>, to diminish their
     normative verbal response. These observations offer an interesting hypothesis
     for future work.</p>
   </sec>
   <sec>
    <title>4.2 Semantic profiles (research question no. 2)</title>
    <p>The semantic categories identified in this study showed that they could be
     differentiated by frequency of use and also, to a certain extent, predicted. On
     the basis of the statistics applied, the two linguistic profiles identified
     cannot be said to have been selected at random, and they represent different
     clusters of linguistic choices and preferences for lexical units associated with
     the socio-affective domain. The high presence, in both profiles, of words
     associated with the category affective processes and the fact that the
     subcategory positive emotion is the best predictor could be a feature of
     language itself in this discipline, but could also be considered a desirable
     professional trait and skill. This is reaffirmed in work by <xref
      ref-type="bibr" rid="B10">Decker-Woodrow (2018)</xref>, who reports that
     greater emotional support, classroom management skills, and quality interactions
     are all characteristics of efficient facilitators in early education settings.
     On the other hand, as observed in the second cluster, the high presence of the
     semantic category associated with the social domain can be contextualized as
     suggested by <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B5">Cejudo and López-Delgado
      (2017)</xref> and based on a tendency by some teachers to exhibit a high
     degree of sociability in their interactions within educational settings. These
     findings in part suggest a need to acquire appropriate socio-affective teaching
     skills for a proper, balanced enrichment of both the social and affective
     domains.</p>
    <p>On the other hand, a low density of words associated with negative emotions was
     found across all categories identified, which, as indicated above, is a common
     denominator for the two profiles observed. Similarly, this could tentatively be
     explained as a discipline-specific feature of language in this educational
     setting, but the presence of such a distribution (a high density of words
     associated with positive emotions and a low density associated with negative
     emotions) may also point to other variables that may affect language production
     by these professional educators. The level of professional literacy, command of
     discipline-specific language, professional experience, academic credentials,
     personality traits and level of professional stress are a few variables that may
     produce this impact. For example, the number of children in each class, high
     noise levels and/or other aspects of the work environment increase stress levels
     and may “taint” educators’ speech with words associated with negative emotions.
     Importantly, the data tended toward differentiating a third cluster
     characterized by the predominant use of words with a negative emotional
     connotation, but ultimately, due to the low number of members in the cluster, it
     was not included.</p>
    <p>It should also be noted that the low number of participants in the sample does
     not allow us to assume that these findings are significant across the general
     population of educators. However, the small differences observed between the
     cluster mean centers suggests high data homogeneity - in other words, word
     production tends to be similar in both clusters. This similarity in distribution
     can provisionally be attributed to a two-layer explanation: on the one hand, a
     consistent formative process, and on the other, deficiencies in training and/or,
     ultimately, an excessive focus on certain semantic categories (e.g. positive
     emotions), which may be associated with professional bias due to working with
     children at such a young age.</p>
   </sec>
   <sec>
    <title>4.3 Predictors of socio-affective words (research question no. 3)</title>
    <p>Many of the variables failed to meet the assumptions for the regression analysis,
     which provides a valuable insight into the structure and complexity of this type
     of linguistic data and the methodology required for the data collection process.
     The findings showed that most semantic categories in the socio-affective domain
     - family, friends, affective processes, positive emotion, negative emotion,
     anxiety, anger, and sadness - are, as expected, largely good predictors of one
     another. These can be joined by exclusion, sexual, causation, motion, ingestion,
     health, and body, which are also sufficiently good predictors of the production
     of words associated with semantic categories in the socio-affective domain.
     Exploring these predictive relationships between semantic categories and their
     specific lexical units is shaping up as an attractive line of future
     research.</p>
   </sec>
   <sec>
    <title>4.4 Limitations and future directions</title>
    <p>Forthcoming studies in this area should be enriched by extending the
     methodological design to take into account comparison groups (e.g. teachers in
     primary and secondary education), and ideally by also including a longitudinal
     design to observe the behavior and stability of these semantic categories,
     profiles, and predictors over time. In addition, a larger number of participants
     would ensure greater validity and reliability by using parametric statistics.
     One other relevant consideration concerns non-discrimination in data collection.
     While this study leveraged the advantages of continuously recording information,
     future work may be more flexible and define more precisely the scope of the
     corpus from which data is to be extracted, for example by segmenting audio
     recordings prior to analysis. Furthermore, the software used groups words in
     linguistic categories that may not conform exactly to the distinctive use of
     language by the research subjects. Future research should take this into account
     and describe the particular use of socio-affective language by employing their
     own indices that acknowledge the idiosyncrasies of the participants. One other
     important issue concerns the exploration of more complex meanings in educators’
     socio-affective speech, which would enable a better contextually-situated
     characterization of this linguistic phenomenon. Lastly, a parallel
     characterization of the production of socio-affective words by children would
     offer a more comprehensive perspective of the dynamics of communication within
     the early education classroom, in accordance with research trends in designing
     studies on language acquisition.</p>
   </sec>
  </sec>
  <sec sec-type="conclusions">
   <title>V. Conclusions</title>
   <p>The objective of this study was to characterize the production of socio-affective
    words by early childhood educators by exploring their use, frequencies, and typical
    groupings during their regular teaching activities with children of preschool age.
    Our findings suggest dominant lexical densities, two distinctive semantic profiles
    with differing explanatory capacities, and various predictors of socio-affective
    words.</p>
   <p>It is widely reported in relevant literature that an effective teacher will tend to
    provide an unwaveringly high level of support to students, offering numerous
    opportunities for them to practice, make mistakes, and learn. In this sense, the
    presence of a high or low density of words associated with the socio-affective
    domain entails an impact on children’s learning and development process, driving or
    potentially restricting the development of specific skills and knowledge - for
    example, through the acquisition of appropriate vocabulary and/or the acquisition of
    richer descriptive approaches to their own emotional experience. In other words, the
    cognitive scaffolding underpinning teachers’ use of discipline-specific language and
    its influence on child language development is needless to say an essential factor
    that boosts the development of socio-affective skills. This opens up an attractive
    line of research on the role of instructional language in learning, in view of what
    was recently reported by <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B26">Martí and Portolés
     (2019)</xref> and the emotional modulation that early childhood educators’
    teaching styles may represent for children’s behavior.</p>
   <p>Finally, it is hoped that our study will provide an empirical contribution to
    understanding the factors associated with quality and effectiveness in teaching in
    early education by characterizing early childhood educators’ verbal competence, and
    in particular, by identifying the most appropriate lexical choices to meet
    children’s socio-affective needs at each stage of their development. It is our hope
    that these findings will strengthen interest in this line of research and facilitate
    the next steps for further research on this linguistic phenomenon in the specific
    learning context these professional educators work in. We also hope to contribute to
    the construction of updated and ad hoc formative proposals in higher education and
    continuing education for these educators.</p>
  </sec>
 </body>
 <back>
  <ack>
   <title>Acknowledgments:</title>
   <p>We wish to thank the Center for Postgraduate Studies of the University of Zagreb, in
    particular the “Language and Cognitive Neuroscience” doctoral program, and the
    school communities that took part in this research.</p>
  </ack>
  <ref-list>
   <title>References</title>
   <ref id="B1">
    <mixed-citation>Bendezú, J. J., Cole, P. M., Tan, P. Z., Armstrong, L. M., Reitz, E.
     B., &amp; Wolf, R. M. (2017). Child language and parenting antecedents and
     externalizing outcomes of emotion regulation pathways across early childhood: A
     person-centered approach. <italic>Development and Psychopathology</italic>,
      <italic>30</italic>(4), 1-16.
     https://doi.org/10.1017/s0954579417001675</mixed-citation>
    <element-citation publication-type="journal">
     <person-group person-group-type="author">
      <name>
       <surname>Bendezú</surname>
       <given-names>J. J.</given-names>
      </name>
      <name>
       <surname>Cole</surname>
       <given-names>P. M.</given-names>
      </name>
      <name>
       <surname>Tan</surname>
       <given-names>P. Z.</given-names>
      </name>
      <name>
       <surname>Armstrong</surname>
       <given-names>L. M.</given-names>
      </name>
      <name>
       <surname>Reitz</surname>
       <given-names>E. B.</given-names>
      </name>
      <name>
       <surname>Wolf</surname>
       <given-names>R. M.</given-names>
      </name>
     </person-group>
     <year>2017</year>
     <article-title>Child language and parenting antecedents and externalizing
      outcomes of emotion regulation pathways across early childhood: A
      person-centered approach</article-title>
     <source>Development and Psychopathology</source>
     <volume>30</volume>
     <issue>4</issue>
     <fpage>1</fpage>
     <lpage>16</lpage>
     <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1017/s0954579417001675</pub-id>
    </element-citation>
   </ref>
   <ref id="B2">
    <mixed-citation>Brown, Ch. P., Ku, D. H., &amp; Barry, D. P. (2020): Making sense of
     instruction within the changed kindergarten: perspectives from preservice early
     childhood educators and teacher educators. <italic>Journal of Early Childhood
      Teacher Education</italic>, <italic>42</italic>(1), 1-33.
     https://doi.org/10.1080/10901027.2020.1726532</mixed-citation>
    <element-citation publication-type="journal">
     <person-group person-group-type="author">
      <name>
       <surname>Brown</surname>
       <given-names>Ch. P.</given-names>
      </name>
      <name>
       <surname>Ku</surname>
       <given-names>D. H.</given-names>
      </name>
      <name>
       <surname>Barry</surname>
       <given-names>D. P.</given-names>
      </name>
     </person-group>
     <year>2020</year>
     <article-title>Making sense of instruction within the changed kindergarten:
      perspectives from preservice early childhood educators and teacher
      educators</article-title>
     <source>Journal of Early Childhood Teacher Education</source>
     <volume>42</volume>
     <issue>1</issue>
     <fpage>1</fpage>
     <lpage>33</lpage>
     <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1080/10901027.2020.1726532</pub-id>
    </element-citation>
   </ref>
   <ref id="B3">
    <mixed-citation>Brownell, C. A., Svetlova, M., Anderson, R., Nichols, S. R., &amp;
     Drummond, J. (2012). Socialization of early prosocial behavior: Parents’ talk
     about emotions is associated with sharing and helping in toddlers.
      <italic>Infancy</italic>, <italic>18</italic>(1), 91-119.
     https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1532-7078.2012.00125.x</mixed-citation>
    <element-citation publication-type="journal">
     <person-group person-group-type="author">
      <name>
       <surname>Brownell</surname>
       <given-names>C. A.</given-names>
      </name>
      <name>
       <surname>Svetlova</surname>
       <given-names>M.</given-names>
      </name>
      <name>
       <surname>Anderson</surname>
       <given-names>R.</given-names>
      </name>
      <name>
       <surname>Nichols</surname>
       <given-names>S. R.</given-names>
      </name>
      <name>
       <surname>Drummond</surname>
       <given-names>J.</given-names>
      </name>
     </person-group>
     <year>2012</year>
     <article-title>Socialization of early prosocial behavior: Parents’ talk about
      emotions is associated with sharing and helping in toddlers</article-title>
     <source>Infancy</source>
     <volume>18</volume>
     <issue>1</issue>
     <fpage>91</fpage>
     <lpage>119</lpage>
     <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1111/j.1532-7078.2012.00125.x</pub-id>
    </element-citation>
   </ref>
   <ref id="B4">
    <mixed-citation>Campbell-Barr, V., &amp; Bogatić, K. (2017). Global to local
     perspectives of early childhood education and care. <italic>Early Child
      Development and Care</italic>, <italic>187</italic>(10), 1461-1470.
     https://doi.org/10.1080/03004430.2017.1342436</mixed-citation>
    <element-citation publication-type="journal">
     <person-group person-group-type="author">
      <name>
       <surname>Campbell-Barr</surname>
       <given-names>V.</given-names>
      </name>
      <name>
       <surname>Bogatić</surname>
       <given-names>K.</given-names>
      </name>
     </person-group>
     <year>2017</year>
     <article-title>Global to local perspectives of early childhood education and
      care</article-title>
     <source>Early Child Development and Care</source>
     <volume>187</volume>
     <issue>10</issue>
     <fpage>1461</fpage>
     <lpage>1470</lpage>
     <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1080/03004430.2017.1342436</pub-id>
    </element-citation>
   </ref>
   <ref id="B5">
    <mixed-citation>Cejudo, J., &amp; López-Delgado, M. L. (2017). Importancia de la
     inteligencia emocional en la práctica docente: un estudio con maestros
     [Importance of emotional intelligence in teaching practice: A study with school
     teachers]. <italic>Psicología Educativa</italic>, <italic>23</italic>(1), 29-36.
     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pse.2016.11.001</mixed-citation>
    <element-citation publication-type="journal">
     <person-group person-group-type="author">
      <name>
       <surname>Cejudo</surname>
       <given-names>J.</given-names>
      </name>
      <name>
       <surname>López-Delgado</surname>
       <given-names>M. L.</given-names>
      </name>
     </person-group>
     <year>2017</year>
     <article-title>Importancia de la inteligencia emocional en la práctica docente:
      un estudio con maestros [Importance of emotional intelligence in teaching
      practice: A study with school teachers]</article-title>
     <source>Psicología Educativa</source>
     <volume>23</volume>
     <issue>1</issue>
     <fpage>29</fpage>
     <lpage>36</lpage>
     <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1016/j.pse.2016.11.001</pub-id>
    </element-citation>
   </ref>
   <ref id="B6">
    <mixed-citation>Cekaite, A., &amp; Bergnehr, D. (2018). Affectionate touch and care:
     embodied intimacy, compassion and control in early childhood education.
      <italic>European Early Childhood Education Research Journal</italic>
     <italic>, 26</italic>(6), 940-955. https://doi.org/10.1080/1350293x.2018.1533710 </mixed-citation>
    <element-citation publication-type="journal">
     <person-group person-group-type="author">
      <name>
       <surname>Cekaite</surname>
       <given-names>A.</given-names>
      </name>
      <name>
       <surname>Bergnehr</surname>
       <given-names>D.</given-names>
      </name>
     </person-group>
     <year>2018</year>
     <article-title>Affectionate touch and care: embodied intimacy, compassion and
      control in early childhood education</article-title>
     <source>European Early Childhood Education Research Journal</source>
     <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">/10.1080/1350293x.2018.1533710</pub-id>
    </element-citation>
   </ref>
   <ref id="B7">
    <mixed-citation>Cuellar, M. del P., &amp; Farkas, Ch. (2018). Sensibilidad y
     mentalización de las educadoras de párvulos. Predictores del lenguaje infantil a
     los 30 meses [Awareness and mentalization among pre-school teachers. Child
     language predictors at 30 months]. <italic>Perfiles educativos</italic>,
      <italic>40</italic>(160), 64-82.
     https://doi.org/10.22201/iisue.24486167e.2018.160.58507 </mixed-citation>
    <element-citation publication-type="journal">
     <person-group person-group-type="author">
      <name>
       <surname>Cuellar</surname>
       <given-names>M. del P.</given-names>
      </name>
      <name>
       <surname>Farkas</surname>
       <given-names>Ch.</given-names>
      </name>
     </person-group>
     <year>2018</year>
     <article-title>Sensibilidad y mentalización de las educadoras de párvulos.
      Predictores del lenguaje infantil a los 30 meses [Awareness and
      mentalization among pre-school teachers. Child language predictors at 30
      months]</article-title>
     <source>Perfiles educativos</source>
     <volume>40</volume>
     <issue>160</issue>
     <fpage>64</fpage>
     <lpage>82</lpage>
     <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.22201/iisue.24486167e.2018.160.58507</pub-id>
    </element-citation>
   </ref>
   <ref id="B8">
    <mixed-citation>Cunningham, J. E., Zimmerman, K. N., Ledford, J. R., &amp; Kaiser,
     A. P. (2019). Comparison of measurement systems for collecting teacher language
     data in early childhood settings. <italic>Early Childhood Research
      Quarterly</italic>, <italic>49</italic>, 164-174.
     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecresq.2019.06.008 </mixed-citation>
    <element-citation publication-type="journal">
     <person-group person-group-type="author">
      <name>
       <surname>Cunningham</surname>
       <given-names>J. E.</given-names>
      </name>
      <name>
       <surname>Zimmerman</surname>
       <given-names>K. N.</given-names>
      </name>
      <name>
       <surname>Ledford</surname>
       <given-names>J. R.</given-names>
      </name>
      <name>
       <surname>Kaiser</surname>
       <given-names>A. P.</given-names>
      </name>
     </person-group>
     <year>2019</year>
     <article-title>Comparison of measurement systems for collecting teacher language
      data in early childhood settings</article-title>
     <source>Early Childhood Research Quarterly</source>
     <volume>49</volume>
     <fpage>164</fpage>
     <lpage>174</lpage>
     <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1016/j.ecresq.2019.06.008</pub-id>
    </element-citation>
   </ref>
   <ref id="B9">
    <mixed-citation>Dalgren S. (2016). Questions and answers, a seesaw and embodied
     action: How a preschool teacher and children accomplish educational practice. In
     A. Bateman &amp; A. Church (Eds.), <italic>Children’s
      Knowledge-in-Interaction</italic>. Springer.
     https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-10-1703-2_3</mixed-citation>
    <element-citation publication-type="book">
     <person-group person-group-type="author">
      <name>
       <surname>Dalgren</surname>
       <given-names>S.</given-names>
      </name>
     </person-group>
     <year>2016</year>
     <chapter-title>Questions and answers, a seesaw and embodied action: How a
      preschool teacher and children accomplish educational
      practice</chapter-title>
     <person-group person-group-type="editor">
      <name>
       <surname>Bateman</surname>
       <given-names>A.</given-names>
      </name>
      <name>
       <surname>Church</surname>
       <given-names>A.</given-names>
      </name>
     </person-group>
     <source>Children’s Knowledge-in-Interaction</source>
     <publisher-name>Springer</publisher-name>
     <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1007/978-981-10-1703-2_3</pub-id>
    </element-citation>
   </ref>
   <ref id="B10">
    <mixed-citation>Decker-Woodrow, L. (2018). The relationship between internal teacher
     profiles and the quality of teacher-child interactions in prekindergarten.
      <italic>Journal of Research in Childhood Education</italic>,
      <italic>32</italic>(1), 32-51. https://doi.org/10.1080/02568543.2017.1393030 </mixed-citation>
    <element-citation publication-type="journal">
     <person-group person-group-type="author">
      <name>
       <surname>Decker-Woodrow</surname>
       <given-names>L.</given-names>
      </name>
     </person-group>
     <year>2018</year>
     <article-title>The relationship between internal teacher profiles and the
      quality of teacher-child interactions in prekindergarten</article-title>
     <source>Journal of Research in Childhood Education</source>
     <volume>32</volume>
     <issue>1</issue>
     <fpage>32</fpage>
     <lpage>51</lpage>
     <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1080/02568543.2017.1393030</pub-id>
    </element-citation>
   </ref>
   <ref id="B11">
    <mixed-citation>Degotardi, S., Han, F., &amp; Torr, J. (2018). Infants’ experience
     with “near and clear” educator talk: individual variation and its relationship
     to indicators of quality. <italic>International Journal of Early Years
      Education</italic>, <italic>26</italic>(3), 278-294.
     https://doi.org/10.1080/09669760.2018.1479632 </mixed-citation>
    <element-citation publication-type="journal">
     <person-group person-group-type="author">
      <name>
       <surname>Degotardi</surname>
       <given-names>S.</given-names>
      </name>
      <name>
       <surname>Han</surname>
       <given-names>F.</given-names>
      </name>
      <name>
       <surname>Torr</surname>
       <given-names>J.</given-names>
      </name>
     </person-group>
     <year>2018</year>
     <article-title>Infants’ experience with “near and clear” educator talk:
      individual variation and its relationship to indicators of
      quality</article-title>
     <source>International Journal of Early Years Education</source>
     <volume>26</volume>
     <issue>3</issue>
     <fpage>278</fpage>
     <lpage>294</lpage>
     <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1080/09669760.2018.1479632</pub-id>
    </element-citation>
   </ref>
   <ref id="B12">
    <mixed-citation>Doğan, Ö., &amp; Erdiller, Z. B. (2016). The examination of Turkish
     early childhood education teachers’ professional identity. <italic>Early Child
      Development and Care</italic> , <italic>188</italic>(10), 1328-1339.
     https://doi.org/10.1080/03004430.2016.1269763 </mixed-citation>
    <element-citation publication-type="journal">
     <person-group person-group-type="author">
      <name>
       <surname>Doğan</surname>
       <given-names>Ö.</given-names>
      </name>
      <name>
       <surname>Erdiller</surname>
       <given-names>Z. B.</given-names>
      </name>
     </person-group>
     <year>2016</year>
     <article-title>The examination of Turkish early childhood education teachers’
      professional identity</article-title>
     <source>Early Child Development and Care</source>
     <volume>188</volume>
     <issue>10</issue>
     <fpage>1328</fpage>
     <lpage>1339</lpage>
     <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1080/03004430.2016.1269763</pub-id>
    </element-citation>
   </ref>
   <ref id="B13">
    <mixed-citation>Farrow, J. M., Wasik, B. A., &amp; Hindman, A. H. (2020). Exploring
     the unique contributions of teachers’ syntax to preschoolers’ and
     kindergarteners’ vocabulary learning. <italic>Early Childhood Research
      Quarterly</italic> , <italic>51</italic>, 178-190.
     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecresq.2019.08.005 </mixed-citation>
    <element-citation publication-type="journal">
     <person-group person-group-type="author">
      <name>
       <surname>Farrow</surname>
       <given-names>J. M.</given-names>
      </name>
      <name>
       <surname>Wasik</surname>
       <given-names>B. A.</given-names>
      </name>
      <name>
       <surname>Hindman</surname>
       <given-names>A. H.</given-names>
      </name>
     </person-group>
     <year>2020</year>
     <article-title>Exploring the unique contributions of teachers’ syntax to
      preschoolers’ and kindergarteners’ vocabulary learning</article-title>
     <source>Early Childhood Research Quarterly</source>
     <volume>51</volume>
     <fpage>178</fpage>
     <lpage>190</lpage>
     <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1016/j.ecresq.2019.08.005</pub-id>
    </element-citation>
   </ref>
   <ref id="B14">
    <mixed-citation>Fernández, M., Bravo, A., &amp; Fernández, P. (2019). Profiles of
     perceived emotional intelligence in future preschool teachers: Implications for
     teacher education. <italic>Revista Electrónica Interuniversitaria de Formación
      del Profesorado</italic>, <italic>22</italic>(1), 209-223.
     https://doi.org/10.6018/reifop.22.1.344131 </mixed-citation>
    <element-citation publication-type="journal">
     <person-group person-group-type="author">
      <name>
       <surname>Fernández</surname>
       <given-names>M.</given-names>
      </name>
      <name>
       <surname>Bravo</surname>
       <given-names>A.</given-names>
      </name>
      <name>
       <surname>Fernández</surname>
       <given-names>P.</given-names>
      </name>
     </person-group>
     <year>2019</year>
     <article-title>Profiles of perceived emotional intelligence in future preschool
      teachers: Implications for teacher education</article-title>
     <source>Revista Electrónica Interuniversitaria de Formación del
      Profesorado</source>
     <volume>22</volume>
     <issue>1</issue>
     <fpage>209</fpage>
     <lpage>223</lpage>
     <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.6018/reifop.22.1.344131</pub-id>
    </element-citation>
   </ref>
   <ref id="B15">
    <mixed-citation>Fontaine, J. J., Scherer, K. R., &amp; Soriano, C. (2013).
      <italic>Components of emotional meaning: A sourcebook</italic>. Oxford
     University Press.</mixed-citation>
    <element-citation publication-type="book">
     <person-group person-group-type="author">
      <name>
       <surname>Fontaine</surname>
       <given-names>J. J.</given-names>
      </name>
      <name>
       <surname>Scherer</surname>
       <given-names>K. R.</given-names>
      </name>
      <name>
       <surname>Soriano</surname>
       <given-names>C.</given-names>
      </name>
     </person-group>
     <year>2013</year>
     <source>Components of emotional meaning: A sourcebook</source>
     <publisher-name>Oxford University Press</publisher-name>
    </element-citation>
   </ref>
   <ref id="B16">
    <mixed-citation>Halliday, M. A. K. (2014). <italic>Halliday’s Introduction to
      functional grammar</italic> (4th edition). Routledge. </mixed-citation>
    <element-citation publication-type="book">
     <person-group person-group-type="author">
      <name>
       <surname>Halliday</surname>
       <given-names>M. A. K.</given-names>
      </name>
     </person-group>
     <year>2014</year>
     <source>Halliday’s Introduction to functional grammar</source>
     <edition>4</edition>
     <publisher-name>Routledge</publisher-name>
    </element-citation>
   </ref>
   <ref id="B17">
    <mixed-citation>Hinojosa, J. A., Moreno, E. M., &amp; Ferré, P. (2019). Affective
     neurolinguistics: Towards a framework for reconciling language and emotion.
      <italic>Language, Cognition and Neuroscience</italic>,
     <italic>35</italic>(7) 1-27. https://doi.org/10.1080/23273798.2019.1620957 </mixed-citation>
    <element-citation publication-type="journal">
     <person-group person-group-type="author">
      <name>
       <surname>Hinojosa</surname>
       <given-names>J. A.</given-names>
      </name>
      <name>
       <surname>Moreno</surname>
       <given-names>E. M.</given-names>
      </name>
      <name>
       <surname>Ferré</surname>
       <given-names>P.</given-names>
      </name>
     </person-group>
     <year>2019</year>
     <article-title>Affective neurolinguistics: Towards a framework for reconciling
      language and emotion</article-title>
     <source>Language, Cognition and Neuroscience</source>
     <volume>35</volume>
     <issue>7</issue>
     <fpage>1</fpage>
     <lpage>27</lpage>
     <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1080/23273798.2019.1620957</pub-id>
    </element-citation>
   </ref>
   <ref id="B18">
    <mixed-citation>Hu, B. Y., Chen, L., &amp; Fan, X. (2018). Profiles of teacher-child
     interaction quality in preschool classrooms and teachers’ professional
     competence features. <italic>Educational Psychology</italic>,
      <italic>38</italic>(3), 264-285.
     https://doi.org/10.1080/01443410.2017.1328488 </mixed-citation>
    <element-citation publication-type="journal">
     <person-group person-group-type="author">
      <name>
       <surname>Hu</surname>
       <given-names>B. Y.</given-names>
      </name>
      <name>
       <surname>Chen</surname>
       <given-names>L.</given-names>
      </name>
      <name>
       <surname>Fan</surname>
       <given-names>X.</given-names>
      </name>
     </person-group>
     <year>2018</year>
     <article-title>Profiles of teacher-child interaction quality in preschool
      classrooms and teachers’ professional competence features</article-title>
     <source>Educational Psychology</source>
     <volume>38</volume>
     <issue>3</issue>
     <fpage>264</fpage>
     <lpage>285</lpage>
     <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1080/01443410.2017.1328488</pub-id>
    </element-citation>
   </ref>
   <ref id="B19">
    <mixed-citation>Hu, J., Torr, J., Degotardi, S., &amp; Han, F. (2017). Educators’
     use of commanding language to direct infants’ behaviour: relationship to
     educators’ qualifications and implications for language learning opportunities.
      <italic>Early Years</italic>, <italic>39</italic>(2) 1-15.
     https://doi.org/10.1080/09575146.2017.1368008 </mixed-citation>
    <element-citation publication-type="journal">
     <person-group person-group-type="author">
      <name>
       <surname>Hu</surname>
       <given-names>J.</given-names>
      </name>
      <name>
       <surname>Torr</surname>
       <given-names>J.</given-names>
      </name>
      <name>
       <surname>Degotardi</surname>
       <given-names>S.</given-names>
      </name>
      <name>
       <surname>Han</surname>
       <given-names>F.</given-names>
      </name>
     </person-group>
     <year>2017</year>
     <article-title>Educators’ use of commanding language to direct infants’
      behaviour: relationship to educators’ qualifications and implications for
      language learning opportunities</article-title>
     <source>Early Years</source>
     <volume>39</volume>
     <issue>2</issue>
     <fpage>1</fpage>
     <lpage>15</lpage>
     <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1080/09575146.2017.1368008</pub-id>
    </element-citation>
   </ref>
   <ref id="B20">
    <mixed-citation>Jeon, L., Buettner, C. K., &amp; Hur, E. (2015). Preschool teachers’
     professional background, process quality, and job attitudes: A person-centered
     approach. <italic>Early Education and Development</italic>,
     <italic>27</italic>(4), 551-571. https://doi.org/10.1080/10409289.2016.1099354 </mixed-citation>
    <element-citation publication-type="journal">
     <person-group person-group-type="author">
      <name>
       <surname>Jeon</surname>
       <given-names>L.</given-names>
      </name>
      <name>
       <surname>Buettner</surname>
       <given-names>C. K.</given-names>
      </name>
      <name>
       <surname>Hur</surname>
       <given-names>E.</given-names>
      </name>
     </person-group>
     <year>2015</year>
     <article-title>Preschool teachers’ professional background, process quality, and
      job attitudes: A person-centered approach</article-title>
     <source>Early Education and Development</source>
     <volume>27</volume>
     <issue>4</issue>
     <fpage>551</fpage>
     <lpage>571</lpage>
     <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1080/10409289.2016.1099354</pub-id>
    </element-citation>
   </ref>
   <ref id="B21">
    <mixed-citation>Justice, L. M., Jiang, H., &amp; Strasser, K. (2018). Linguistic
     environment of preschool classrooms: What dimensions support children’s language
     growth? <italic>Early Childhood Research Quarterly</italic> ,
      <italic>42</italic>, 79-92. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecresq.2017.09.003 </mixed-citation>
    <element-citation publication-type="journal">
     <person-group person-group-type="author">
      <name>
       <surname>Justice</surname>
       <given-names>L. M.</given-names>
      </name>
      <name>
       <surname>Jiang</surname>
       <given-names>H.</given-names>
      </name>
      <name>
       <surname>Strasser</surname>
       <given-names>K.</given-names>
      </name>
     </person-group>
     <year>2018</year>
     <article-title>Linguistic environment of preschool classrooms: What dimensions
      support children’s language growth?</article-title>
     <source>Early Childhood Research Quarterly</source>
     <volume>42</volume>
     <fpage>79</fpage>
     <lpage>92</lpage>
     <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1016/j.ecresq.2017.09.003</pub-id>
    </element-citation>
   </ref>
   <ref id="B22">
    <mixed-citation>Kalinowski, E., Egert, F., Gronostaj, A., &amp; Vock, M. (2020).
     Professional development on fostering students’ academic language proficiency
     across the curriculum-A meta-analysis of its impact on teachers’ cognition and
     teaching practices. <italic>Teaching and Teacher Education</italic>,
      <italic>88</italic>. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2019.102971 </mixed-citation>
    <element-citation publication-type="journal">
     <person-group person-group-type="author">
      <name>
       <surname>Kalinowski</surname>
       <given-names>E.</given-names>
      </name>
      <name>
       <surname>Egert</surname>
       <given-names>F.</given-names>
      </name>
      <name>
       <surname>Gronostaj</surname>
       <given-names>A.</given-names>
      </name>
      <name>
       <surname>Vock</surname>
       <given-names>M.</given-names>
      </name>
     </person-group>
     <year>2020</year>
     <article-title>Professional development on fostering students’ academic language
      proficiency across the curriculum-A meta-analysis of its impact on teachers’
      cognition and teaching practices</article-title>
     <source>Teaching and Teacher Education</source>
     <volume>88</volume>
     <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1016/j.tate.2019.102971</pub-id>
    </element-citation>
   </ref>
   <ref id="B23">
    <mixed-citation>King, E. K., &amp; La Paro, K. M. (2018). Teachers’ emotion
     minimizing language and toddlers’ social emotional competence. <italic>Early
      Education and Development</italic> , <italic>29</italic>(8), 989-1003.
     https://doi.org/10.1080/10409289.2018.1510214 </mixed-citation>
    <element-citation publication-type="journal">
     <person-group person-group-type="author">
      <name>
       <surname>King</surname>
       <given-names>E. K.</given-names>
      </name>
      <name>
       <surname>La Paro</surname>
       <given-names>K. M.</given-names>
      </name>
     </person-group>
     <year>2018</year>
     <article-title>Teachers’ emotion minimizing language and toddlers’ social
      emotional competence</article-title>
     <source>Early Education and Development</source>
     <volume>29</volume>
     <issue>8</issue>
     <fpage>989</fpage>
     <lpage>1003</lpage>
     <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1080/10409289.2018.1510214</pub-id>
    </element-citation>
   </ref>
   <ref id="B24">
    <mixed-citation>Manning, M., Wong, G. T. W., Fleming, C. M., &amp; Garvis, S.
     (2019). Is teacher qualification associated with the quality of the early
     childhood education and care environment? A meta-analytic review. <italic>Review
      of Educational Research</italic>, <italic>89</italic>(3), 370-415.
     https://doi.org/10.3102/0034654319837540 </mixed-citation>
    <element-citation publication-type="journal">
     <person-group person-group-type="author">
      <name>
       <surname>Manning</surname>
       <given-names>M.</given-names>
      </name>
      <name>
       <surname>Wong</surname>
       <given-names>G. T. W.</given-names>
      </name>
      <name>
       <surname>Fleming</surname>
       <given-names>C. M.</given-names>
      </name>
      <name>
       <surname>Garvis</surname>
       <given-names>S.</given-names>
      </name>
     </person-group>
     <year>2019</year>
     <article-title>Is teacher qualification associated with the quality of the early
      childhood education and care environment? A meta-analytic
      review</article-title>
     <source>Review of Educational Research</source>
     <volume>89</volume>
     <issue>3</issue>
     <fpage>370</fpage>
     <lpage>415</lpage>
     <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.3102/0034654319837540</pub-id>
    </element-citation>
   </ref>
   <ref id="B25">
    <mixed-citation>Markussen-Brown, J., Juhl, C. B., Piasta, S. B., Bleses, D., Højen,
     A., &amp; Justice, L. M. (2017). The effects of language- and literacy-focused
     professional development on early educators and children: A best-evidence
     meta-analysis. <italic>Early Childhood Research Quarterly</italic> ,
      <italic>38</italic>, 97-115. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecresq.2016.07.002 </mixed-citation>
    <element-citation publication-type="journal">
     <person-group person-group-type="author">
      <name>
       <surname>Markussen-Brown</surname>
       <given-names>J.</given-names>
      </name>
      <name>
       <surname>Juhl</surname>
       <given-names>C. B.</given-names>
      </name>
      <name>
       <surname>Piasta</surname>
       <given-names>S. B.</given-names>
      </name>
      <name>
       <surname>Bleses</surname>
       <given-names>D.</given-names>
      </name>
      <name>
       <surname>Højen</surname>
       <given-names>A.</given-names>
      </name>
      <name>
       <surname>Justice</surname>
       <given-names>L. M.</given-names>
      </name>
     </person-group>
     <year>2017</year>
     <article-title>The effects of language- and literacy-focused professional
      development on early educators and children: A best-evidence
      meta-analysis</article-title>
     <source>Early Childhood Research Quarterly</source>
     <volume>38</volume>
     <fpage>97</fpage>
     <lpage>115</lpage>
     <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1016/j.ecresq.2016.07.002</pub-id>
    </element-citation>
   </ref>
   <ref id="B26">
    <mixed-citation>Martí, O., &amp; Portolés, L. (2019). Is teacher talk for very young
     language learners pragmatically tuned? Directives in two EAL classrooms. In
      <italic>Investigating the Learning of Pragmatics across Ages and
      Contexts</italic> (Ultrecht Studies in Language and Communication, Vol. 34),
     pp. 87-122. https://doi.org/10.1163/9789004409699_006 </mixed-citation>
    <element-citation publication-type="book">
     <person-group person-group-type="author">
      <name>
       <surname>Martí</surname>
       <given-names>O.</given-names>
      </name>
      <name>
       <surname>Portolés</surname>
       <given-names>L.</given-names>
      </name>
     </person-group>
     <year>2019</year>
     <chapter-title>Is teacher talk for very young language learners pragmatically
      tuned? Directives in two EAL classrooms</chapter-title>
     <source>Investigating the Learning of Pragmatics across Ages and
      Contexts</source>
     <comment>Ultrecht Studies in Language and Communication</comment>
     <volume>34</volume>
     <fpage>87</fpage>
     <lpage>122</lpage>
     <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1163/9789004409699_006</pub-id>
    </element-citation>
   </ref>
   <ref id="B27">
    <mixed-citation>McNally, S., McCrory, C., Quigley, J., &amp; Murray, A. (2019).
     Decomposing the social gradient in children’s vocabulary skills at 3 years of
     age: A mediation analysis using data from a large representative cohort study.
      <italic>Infant Behavior and Development</italic>, <italic>57</italic>, 1-13.
     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.infbeh.2019.04.008 </mixed-citation>
    <element-citation publication-type="journal">
     <person-group person-group-type="author">
      <name>
       <surname>McNally</surname>
       <given-names>S.</given-names>
      </name>
      <name>
       <surname>McCrory</surname>
       <given-names>C.</given-names>
      </name>
      <name>
       <surname>Quigley</surname>
       <given-names>J.</given-names>
      </name>
      <name>
       <surname>Murray</surname>
       <given-names>A.</given-names>
      </name>
     </person-group>
     <year>2019</year>
     <article-title>Decomposing the social gradient in children’s vocabulary skills
      at 3 years of age: A mediation analysis using data from a large
      representative cohort study</article-title>
     <source>Infant Behavior and Development</source>
     <volume>57</volume>
     <fpage>1</fpage>
     <lpage>13</lpage>
     <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1016/j.infbeh.2019.04.008</pub-id>
    </element-citation>
   </ref>
   <ref id="B28">
    <mixed-citation>Mischo, C., Wahl, S., Strohmer, J., &amp; Hendler, J. (2012).
     Knowledge orientations of prospective early childhood educators: A study of
     students’ scientific versus subjective orientations in teacher education courses
     in Germany. <italic>Journal of Early Childhood Teacher Education</italic> ,
      <italic>33</italic>(2), 144-162.
     https://doi.org/10.1080/10901027.2012.675836 </mixed-citation>
    <element-citation publication-type="journal">
     <person-group person-group-type="author">
      <name>
       <surname>Mischo</surname>
       <given-names>C.</given-names>
      </name>
      <name>
       <surname>Wahl</surname>
       <given-names>S.</given-names>
      </name>
      <name>
       <surname>Strohmer</surname>
       <given-names>J.</given-names>
      </name>
      <name>
       <surname>Hendler</surname>
       <given-names>J.</given-names>
      </name>
     </person-group>
     <year>2012</year>
     <article-title>Knowledge orientations of prospective early childhood educators:
      A study of students’ scientific versus subjective orientations in teacher
      education courses in Germany</article-title>
     <source>Journal of Early Childhood Teacher Education</source>
     <volume>33</volume>
     <issue>2</issue>
     <fpage>144</fpage>
     <lpage>162</lpage>
     <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1080/10901027.2012.675836</pub-id>
    </element-citation>
   </ref>
   <ref id="B29">
    <mixed-citation>Muhinyi, A., &amp; Rowe, M. L. (2019). Shared reading with preverbal
     infants and later language development. <italic>Journal of Applied Developmental
      Psychology</italic>, <italic>64</italic>, 1-11.
     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.appdev.2019.101053 </mixed-citation>
    <element-citation publication-type="journal">
     <person-group person-group-type="author">
      <name>
       <surname>Muhinyi</surname>
       <given-names>A.</given-names>
      </name>
      <name>
       <surname>Rowe</surname>
       <given-names>M. L.</given-names>
      </name>
     </person-group>
     <year>2019</year>
     <article-title>Shared reading with preverbal infants and later language
      development</article-title>
     <source>Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology</source>
     <volume>64</volume>
     <fpage>1</fpage>
     <lpage>11</lpage>
     <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1016/j.appdev.2019.101053</pub-id>
    </element-citation>
   </ref>
   <ref id="B30">
    <mixed-citation>Nasiopoulou, P., Williams, P., Sheridan, S., &amp; Yang Hansen, K.
     (2017). Exploring preschool teachers’ professional profiles in Swedish
     preschool: A latent class analysis. <italic>Early Child Development and
      Care</italic> , <italic>189</italic>(8), 1-19.
     https://doi.org/10.1080/03004430.2017.1375482 </mixed-citation>
    <element-citation publication-type="journal">
     <person-group person-group-type="author">
      <name>
       <surname>Nasiopoulou</surname>
       <given-names>P.</given-names>
      </name>
      <name>
       <surname>Williams</surname>
       <given-names>P.</given-names>
      </name>
      <name>
       <surname>Sheridan</surname>
       <given-names>S.</given-names>
      </name>
      <name>
       <surname>Yang Hansen</surname>
       <given-names>K.</given-names>
      </name>
     </person-group>
     <year>2017</year>
     <article-title>Exploring preschool teachers’ professional profiles in Swedish
      preschool: A latent class analysis</article-title>
     <source>Early Child Development and Care</source>
     <volume>189</volume>
     <issue>8</issue>
     <fpage>1</fpage>
     <lpage>19</lpage>
     <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1080/03004430.2017.1375482</pub-id>
    </element-citation>
   </ref>
   <ref id="B31">
    <mixed-citation>Oberhuemer, P. (2015). Professional profiles in early childhood
     education and care: Continuity and change in Europe. In H. Willekens, K.
     Scheiwe, &amp; K. Nawrotzki (Eds.), <italic>The development of early childhood
      education in Europe and North America: Historical and comparative
      perspectives</italic> (pp. 195-214). https://doi.org/10.1057/9781137441980 </mixed-citation>
    <element-citation publication-type="book">
     <person-group person-group-type="author">
      <name>
       <surname>Oberhuemer</surname>
       <given-names>P.</given-names>
      </name>
     </person-group>
     <year>2015</year>
     <chapter-title>Professional profiles in early childhood education and care:
      Continuity and change in Europe</chapter-title>
     <person-group person-group-type="editor">
      <name>
       <surname>Willekens</surname>
       <given-names>H.</given-names>
      </name>
      <name>
       <surname>Scheiwe</surname>
       <given-names>K.</given-names>
      </name>
      <name>
       <surname>Nawrotzki</surname>
       <given-names>K.</given-names>
      </name>
     </person-group>
     <source>The development of early childhood education in Europe and North
      America: Historical and comparative perspectives</source>
     <fpage>195</fpage>
     <lpage>214</lpage>
     <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1057/9781137441980</pub-id>
    </element-citation>
   </ref>
   <ref id="B32">
    <mixed-citation>Pennebaker, J. W., Boyd, R. L., Jordan, K., &amp; Blackburn, K.
     (2015). <italic>The development and psychometric properties of
     LIWC2015</italic>. University of Texas at Austin.</mixed-citation>
    <element-citation publication-type="book">
     <person-group person-group-type="author">
      <name>
       <surname>Pennebaker</surname>
       <given-names>J. W.</given-names>
      </name>
      <name>
       <surname>Boyd</surname>
       <given-names>R. L.</given-names>
      </name>
      <name>
       <surname>Jordan</surname>
       <given-names>K.</given-names>
      </name>
      <name>
       <surname>Blackburn</surname>
       <given-names>K.</given-names>
      </name>
     </person-group>
     <year>2015</year>
     <source>The development and psychometric properties of LIWC2015</source>
     <publisher-name>University of Texas at Austin</publisher-name>
    </element-citation>
   </ref>
   <ref id="B33">
    <mixed-citation>Piasta, S. B., Park, S., Farley, K. S., Justice, L. M., O'Connell,
     A. A. (2019). Early childhood educators' knowledge about language and literacy:
     Associations with practice and children's learning. <italic>Dyslexia</italic>,
      <italic>26</italic>(2), 1-16. https://doi.org/10.1002/dys.1612 </mixed-citation>
    <element-citation publication-type="journal">
     <person-group person-group-type="author">
      <name>
       <surname>Piasta</surname>
       <given-names>S. B.</given-names>
      </name>
      <name>
       <surname>Park</surname>
       <given-names>S.</given-names>
      </name>
      <name>
       <surname>Farley</surname>
       <given-names>K. S.</given-names>
      </name>
      <name>
       <surname>Justice</surname>
       <given-names>L. M.</given-names>
      </name>
      <name>
       <surname>O'Connell</surname>
       <given-names>A. A.</given-names>
      </name>
     </person-group>
     <year>2019</year>
     <article-title>Early childhood educators' knowledge about language and literacy:
      Associations with practice and children's learning</article-title>
     <source>Dyslexia</source>
     <volume>26</volume>
     <issue>2</issue>
     <fpage>1</fpage>
     <lpage>16</lpage>
     <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1002/dys.1612</pub-id>
    </element-citation>
   </ref>
   <ref id="B34">
    <mixed-citation>Pizarro, P., &amp; Espinoza, V. (2016). ¿Calidad en la formación
     inicial docente? Análisis de los nuevos estándares de la educación de párvulos
     en Chile [Quality in initial teacher training? New standards analysis for early
     childhood education in Chile]. <italic>Perspectiva Educacional, Formación de
      Profesores</italic>, <italic>55</italic>(1), 152-167.
     https://doi.org/10.4151/07189729-Vol.55-Iss.1-Art.383 </mixed-citation>
    <element-citation publication-type="journal">
     <person-group person-group-type="author">
      <name>
       <surname>Pizarro</surname>
       <given-names>P.</given-names>
      </name>
      <name>
       <surname>Espinoza</surname>
       <given-names>V.</given-names>
      </name>
     </person-group>
     <year>2016</year>
     <article-title>¿Calidad en la formación inicial docente? Análisis de los nuevos
      estándares de la educación de párvulos en Chile [Quality in initial teacher
      training? New standards analysis for early childhood education in
      Chile]</article-title>
     <source>Perspectiva Educacional, Formación de Profesores</source>
     <volume>55</volume>
     <issue>1</issue>
     <fpage>152</fpage>
     <lpage>167</lpage>
     <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.4151/07189729-Vol.55-Iss.1-Art.383</pub-id>
    </element-citation>
   </ref>
   <ref id="B35">
    <mixed-citation>Pizarro, P., Peralta, N., Audisio, C., Mareovich, F., Alam, F.,
     Peralta, O., &amp; Rosemberg, C. (2019). El lenguaje de las educadoras y de
     los(as) niños(as) en distintas situaciones de aula [The language of educators
     and children in different classroom situations]. <italic>Pensamiento Educativo,
      Revista de Investigación Educacional Latinoamericana</italic>,
      <italic>56</italic>(1), 1-18. https://doi.org/10.7764/PEL.56.1.2019.6 </mixed-citation>
    <element-citation publication-type="journal">
     <person-group person-group-type="author">
      <name>
       <surname>Pizarro</surname>
       <given-names>P.</given-names>
      </name>
      <name>
       <surname>Peralta</surname>
       <given-names>N.</given-names>
      </name>
      <name>
       <surname>Audisio</surname>
       <given-names>C.</given-names>
      </name>
      <name>
       <surname>Mareovich</surname>
       <given-names>F.</given-names>
      </name>
      <name>
       <surname>Alam</surname>
       <given-names>F.</given-names>
      </name>
      <name>
       <surname>Peralta</surname>
       <given-names>O.</given-names>
      </name>
      <name>
       <surname>Rosemberg</surname>
       <given-names>C.</given-names>
      </name>
     </person-group>
     <year>2019</year>
     <article-title>El lenguaje de las educadoras y de los(as) niños(as) en distintas
      situaciones de aula [The language of educators and children in different
      classroom situations]</article-title>
     <source>Pensamiento Educativo, Revista de Investigación Educacional
      Latinoamericana</source>
     <volume>56</volume>
     <issue>1</issue>
     <fpage>1</fpage>
     <lpage>18</lpage>
     <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.7764/PEL.56.1.2019.6</pub-id>
    </element-citation>
   </ref>
   <ref id="B36">
    <mixed-citation>Ruggeri, A., Swaboda, N., Sim, Z. L., &amp; Gopnik, A. (2019). Shake
     it baby, but only when needed: Preschoolers adapt their exploratory strategies
     to the information structure of the task. <italic>Cognition</italic>,
      <italic>193</italic>, 1-7. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2019.104013 </mixed-citation>
    <element-citation publication-type="journal">
     <person-group person-group-type="author">
      <name>
       <surname>Ruggeri</surname>
       <given-names>A.</given-names>
      </name>
      <name>
       <surname>Swaboda</surname>
       <given-names>N.</given-names>
      </name>
      <name>
       <surname>Sim</surname>
       <given-names>Z. L.</given-names>
      </name>
      <name>
       <surname>Gopnik</surname>
       <given-names>A.</given-names>
      </name>
     </person-group>
     <year>2019</year>
     <article-title>Shake it baby, but only when needed: Preschoolers adapt their
      exploratory strategies to the information structure of the
      task</article-title>
     <source>Cognition</source>
     <volume>193</volume>
     <fpage>1</fpage>
     <lpage>7</lpage>
     <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1016/j.cognition.2019.104013</pub-id>
    </element-citation>
   </ref>
   <ref id="B37">
    <mixed-citation>Schleppegrell, M. J. (2004). <italic>The language of schooling: A
      functional linguistics perspective</italic>. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates
     Publishers.</mixed-citation>
    <element-citation publication-type="book">
     <person-group person-group-type="author">
      <name>
       <surname>Schleppegrell</surname>
       <given-names>M. J.</given-names>
      </name>
     </person-group>
     <year>2004</year>
     <source>The language of schooling: A functional linguistics perspective</source>
     <publisher-name>Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publishers</publisher-name>
    </element-citation>
   </ref>
   <ref id="B38">
    <mixed-citation>Shahane, A. D., &amp; Denny, B. T. (2019). Predicting emotional
     health indicators from linguistic evidence of psychological distancing.
      <italic>Stress and Health</italic>, <italic>35</italic>(2), 1-33.
     https://doi.org/10.1002/smi.2855 </mixed-citation>
    <element-citation publication-type="journal">
     <person-group person-group-type="author">
      <name>
       <surname>Shahane</surname>
       <given-names>A. D.</given-names>
      </name>
      <name>
       <surname>Denny</surname>
       <given-names>B. T.</given-names>
      </name>
     </person-group>
     <year>2019</year>
     <article-title>Predicting emotional health indicators from linguistic evidence
      of psychological distancing</article-title>
     <source>Stress and Health</source>
     <volume>35</volume>
     <issue>2</issue>
     <fpage>1</fpage>
     <lpage>33</lpage>
     <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1002/smi.2855</pub-id>
    </element-citation>
   </ref>
   <ref id="B39">
    <mixed-citation>Subsecretaría de Educación Parvularia (2018). Nuevas Bases
     Curriculares, BCEP [New curricular foundations, BCEP]. 1-136. <ext-link
      ext-link-type="uri"
      xlink:href="https://parvularia.mineduc.cl/bases-curriculares-ed-parvularia/"
      >https://parvularia.mineduc.cl/bases-curriculares-ed-parvularia/</ext-link>
    </mixed-citation>
    <element-citation publication-type="webpage">
     <person-group person-group-type="author">
      <collab>Subsecretaría de Educación Parvularia</collab>
     </person-group>
     <year>2018</year>
     <source>Nuevas Bases Curriculares, BCEP [New curricular foundations,
      BCEP]</source>
     <fpage>1</fpage>
     <lpage>136</lpage>
     <ext-link ext-link-type="uri"
      xlink:href="https://parvularia.mineduc.cl/bases-curriculares-ed-parvularia/"
      >https://parvularia.mineduc.cl/bases-curriculares-ed-parvularia/</ext-link>
    </element-citation>
   </ref>
   <ref id="B40">
    <mixed-citation>Subsecretaría de Educación Parvularia (2019, March). Lenguaje
     verbal: Orientaciones técnico-pedagógicas para el nivel de educación parvularia
     [Verbal language: Technical and pedagogical guidelines for early education].
      <ext-link ext-link-type="uri"
      xlink:href="https://parvularia.mineduc.cl/wp-content/uploads/sites/34/2019/06/verbal-alta_c.pdf"
      >https://parvularia.mineduc.cl/wp-content/uploads/sites/34/2019/06/verbal-alta_c.pdf</ext-link>
    </mixed-citation>
    <element-citation publication-type="webpage">
     <person-group person-group-type="author">
      <collab>Subsecretaría de Educación Parvularia</collab>
     </person-group>
     <month>03</month>
     <year>2019</year>
     <source>Lenguaje verbal: Orientaciones técnico-pedagógicas para el nivel de
      educación parvularia [Verbal language: Technical and pedagogical guidelines
      for early education].</source>
     <ext-link ext-link-type="uri"
      xlink:href="https://parvularia.mineduc.cl/wp-content/uploads/sites/34/2019/06/verbal-alta_c.pdf"
      >https://parvularia.mineduc.cl/wp-content/uploads/sites/34/2019/06/verbal-alta_c.pdf</ext-link>
    </element-citation>
   </ref>
   <ref id="B41">
    <mixed-citation>Tatalović, S., Skočić, S., &amp; Josipović, M. (2018). Early
     childhood educators’ personality and competencies for teaching children with
     disabilities as predictors of their professional burnout. <italic>Socijalna
      psihijatrija</italic>, <italic>46</italic>(4), 390-405.
     https://doi.org/10.24869/spsih.2018.390 </mixed-citation>
    <element-citation publication-type="journal">
     <person-group person-group-type="author">
      <name>
       <surname>Tatalović</surname>
       <given-names>S.</given-names>
      </name>
      <name>
       <surname>Skočić</surname>
       <given-names>S.</given-names>
      </name>
      <name>
       <surname>Josipović</surname>
       <given-names>M.</given-names>
      </name>
     </person-group>
     <year>2018</year>
     <article-title>Early childhood educators’ personality and competencies for
      teaching children with disabilities as predictors of their professional
      burnout</article-title>
     <source>Socijalna psihijatrija</source>
     <volume>46</volume>
     <issue>4</issue>
     <fpage>390</fpage>
     <lpage>405</lpage>
     <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.24869/spsih.2018.390</pub-id>
    </element-citation>
   </ref>
   <ref id="B42">
    <mixed-citation>Torr, J. (2020). How “shared” is shared reading: Book-focused
     infant-educator interactions in long day-care centres. <italic>Journal of Early
      Childhood Literacy</italic>, <italic>20</italic>(4), 815-838.
     https://doi.org/10.1177/1468798418792038 </mixed-citation>
    <element-citation publication-type="journal">
     <person-group person-group-type="author">
      <name>
       <surname>Torr</surname>
       <given-names>J.</given-names>
      </name>
     </person-group>
     <year>2020</year>
     <article-title>How “shared” is shared reading: Book-focused infant-educator
      interactions in long day-care centres</article-title>
     <source>Journal of Early Childhood Literacy</source>
     <volume>20</volume>
     <issue>4</issue>
     <fpage>815</fpage>
     <lpage>838</lpage>
     <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1177/1468798418792038</pub-id>
    </element-citation>
   </ref>
   <ref id="B43">
    <mixed-citation>Treviño, E., Toledo, G., &amp; Gempp, R. (2013). Calidad de la
     educación parvularia: las prácticas de clase y el camino a la mejora [Preschool
     education quality: Teacher practices and the path to improvement]. Pensamiento
     Educativo. <italic>Revista de Investigación Educacional
     Latinoamericana</italic>, <italic>50</italic>(1), 40-62.
     https://doi.org/10.7764/PEL.50.1.2013.4 </mixed-citation>
    <element-citation publication-type="journal">
     <person-group person-group-type="author">
      <name>
       <surname>Treviño</surname>
       <given-names>E.</given-names>
      </name>
      <name>
       <surname>Toledo</surname>
       <given-names>G.</given-names>
      </name>
      <name>
       <surname>Gempp</surname>
       <given-names>R.</given-names>
      </name>
     </person-group>
     <year>2013</year>
     <article-title>Calidad de la educación parvularia: las prácticas de clase y el
      camino a la mejora [Preschool education quality: Teacher practices and the
      path to improvement]. Pensamiento Educativo</article-title>
     <source>Revista de Investigación Educacional Latinoamericana</source>
     <volume>50</volume>
     <issue>1</issue>
     <fpage>40</fpage>
     <lpage>62</lpage>
     <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.7764/PEL.50.1.2013.4</pub-id>
    </element-citation>
   </ref>
   <ref id="B44">
    <mixed-citation>Unal, M., &amp; Kurt, G. (2018). Socioeconomic profile of early
     childhood education preservice teachers. <italic>Eurasian Journal of Educational
      Research</italic>, <italic>74</italic>, 61-80.
     https://doi.org/10.14689/ejer.2018.74.4 </mixed-citation>
    <element-citation publication-type="journal">
     <person-group person-group-type="author">
      <name>
       <surname>Unal</surname>
       <given-names>M.</given-names>
      </name>
      <name>
       <surname>Kurt</surname>
       <given-names>G.</given-names>
      </name>
     </person-group>
     <year>2018</year>
     <article-title>Socioeconomic profile of early childhood education preservice
      teachers</article-title>
     <source>Eurasian Journal of Educational Research</source>
     <volume>74</volume>
     <fpage>61</fpage>
     <lpage>80</lpage>
     <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.14689/ejer.2018.74.4</pub-id>
    </element-citation>
   </ref>
   <ref id="B45">
    <mixed-citation>Yao, B., Keitel, A., Bruce, G., Scott, G.G., O'Donnell, P., &amp;
     Sereno, S.C. (2018) Differential emotional processing in concrete and abstract
     words. <italic>Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and
      Cognition</italic> , <italic>44</italic>(7), 1-38.
     https://doi.org/10.1037/xlm0000464</mixed-citation>
    <element-citation publication-type="journal">
     <person-group person-group-type="author">
      <name>
       <surname>Yao</surname>
       <given-names>B.</given-names>
      </name>
      <name>
       <surname>Keitel</surname>
       <given-names>A.</given-names>
      </name>
      <name>
       <surname>Bruce</surname>
       <given-names>G.</given-names>
      </name>
      <name>
       <surname>Scott</surname>
       <given-names>G.G.</given-names>
      </name>
      <name>
       <surname>O'Donnell</surname>
       <given-names>P.</given-names>
      </name>
      <name>
       <surname>Sereno</surname>
       <given-names>S.C.</given-names>
      </name>
     </person-group>
     <year>2018</year>
     <article-title>Differential emotional processing in concrete and abstract
      words</article-title>
     <source>Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and
      Cognition</source>
     <volume>44</volume>
     <issue>7</issue>
     <fpage>1</fpage>
     <lpage>38</lpage>
     <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1037/xlm0000464</pub-id>
    </element-citation>
   </ref>
  </ref-list>
  <fn-group>
   <fn fn-type="other" id="fn1">

    <p><bold>How to cite:</bold> Lería, F. J., Acosta, R. N., &amp; Sasso, P. E. (2021).
     Socio-affective word production by early childhood educators: Lexical densities,
     clusters, and predictors. <italic>Revista Electrónica de Investigación
      Educativa, 23</italic>, e21, 1-15.</p>
   </fn>

  </fn-group>
 </back>
</article>
