Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Quasi-experimental study reveals digital and traditional bibliotherapy both enhance emotion regulation in preschoolers, indicating flexible options for early emotional learning.
Emotion regulation is a foundational skill in early childhood, shaping children’s social competence, academic performance, and psychological well-being. Bibliotherapy-using structured storytelling to support emotional development-has shown promise, yet little is known about how delivery format affects its impact. This study examines the comparative effectiveness of digital storytelling and traditional bibliotherapy in enhancing preschoolers’ emotion regulation. Using a quasi-experimental pre-test–post-test control-group design, the study involved 91 children aged 60–72 months enroled in preschools in Türkiye. The children participated in one of three conditions: digital storytelling, traditional reading, or a no-intervention control condition. Over the course of eight sessions, children in the intervention groups engaged with specially designed bibliotherapeutic stories. Emotion regulation outcomes were measured using the Emotion Regulation Scale, based on teacher and parent evaluations. Both intervention formats produced improvements relative to the control condition according to parent and teacher ratings. In the teacher ratings, although the digital storytelling group had numerically higher adjusted mean scores at post-test and follow-up, the differences between the two intervention groups were not statistically significant. This study makes a contribution by providing comparative evidence on post-intervention and follow-up outcomes of two bibliotherapy modalities, within an extended intervention timeframe. Implications for early childhood educators and policymakers include integrating both traditional and digital methods into early learning environments to support children’s emotional well-being through evidence-based, developmentally appropriate practices.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Özmen et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: