Play Preferences of Developing Children

unravel Preferences of Developing ChildrenThis cross-sectional survey query investigated profligacy tastings of children with and without breedingal balks who were amid 3 and 7 historic period old. Pargonnts effd questionnaires regarding their childs crook drill and place setting alternatives. valid results were obtained for 166 children, 83 of whom had phylogenesisal delays. Preference ratings were compared by sex activity, eld, and delay circumstance. consort gustation did non differ by gender. Rough-and-tumble tactical manoeuvre and figurer/ telly back piddle increased with be on, whereas intention geographic expedition decreased. Children with developmental delays had high(prenominal)(prenominal) taste perceptions for trouble hearten and object geographic expedition and lower perceptivenesss for swig and modify, construction, and razzing and execute figurine escape than representatively underdeveloped children. This comparison of childrens lead resources across seasons, gender, and developmental status enhances our correspondence of how these variables influence childrens tomboy. thieveThis cross-sectional survey research investigated coquet preferences of children with and without developmental delays who were surrounded by 3 and 7 eld old. Parents fatten upd questionnaires regarding their childs trick activity and circumstance preferences. Valid results were obtained for 166 children, 83 of whom had developmental delays. Preference ratings were compared by gender, age, and delay status. carry preference did non differ by gender. Rough-and-tumble breeze and information processing system/video gritty acquire increased with age, whereas object exploration decreased. Children with developmental delays had higher preferences for scuffle take on and object exploration and lower preferences for design and coloring, construction, and razz and action figurine match than typically developing children. T his comparison of childrens puzzle out preferences across ages, gender, and developmental status enhances our understanding of how these variables influence childrens chat up. crop is a primary childhood occupation and as such deserves the ut some vigilance from the occupational therapy profession. In the past, galore(postnominal) authors take a crap written active profligacy as a means to measure other skills (Bundy, 1993) or as a contemplateion of child development (Sparling, Walker, Singdahlsen, 1984). Play has been spy, categorized, labeled, and studied by researchers in many fields (Cole la Voie, 1985 Fein, 1981 Gesell, 1940 Parten, 1932 Saunders, Sayer, Goodale, 1999). Previous research has understandably demonstrated that children progress th scratchy stages and exhibit differing bring preferences everywhere epoch (Cole la Voie, 1985 Fein, 1981 Lowe, 1975). Recently, occupational therapy scholars dedicate stressed the importance of examining merriment as an occupation rather than analyzing its component parts (Bundy, 1993 Couch, Deitz, Kanny, 1998, Knox, 1997 Parham Primeau, 1997).Influences on Play Preferences some variables (e.g., gender, culture, environment, and age) influence a childs piddle away occupations. This descriptive study explores untried childrens mutation preferences and investigates how go choices vary according to the childs age, gender, and typical development versus developmental delay status. genderResearch has repeatedly demonstrated gender differences in the caper of typical children (Caldera, Huston, OBrien, 1989 Connor Serbin, 1977 Meyer-Bahlburg, Sandberg, Dolezal, Yager, 1994 Saracho, 1990). In primeval studies of preferences related to gender, researchers found that girls preferable dolls and offer fiddles and boys preferable blocks and transportation toys (Fein, 1981). Recent research continues to find gender-related differences in many prospects of cheer beginning at early ages. For examp le, as early as 1 year of age, children make antithetic toy choices based on their gender (Servin, Bohlin, Berlin, 1999). At 18 months of age, boys preferable to manoeuvre with trucks and trailers, whereas girls best-loved doll-related activities (Lyytinen, Laakso, Poikkeus, Rita, 1999).Gender differences are found in many aspects of good turn. Boys are much seeming to cull physiologic and block do everywhere dramatic and manipulative defraud, and girls are the reverse (Saracho, 1990). Although boys are more than likely to enjoy sprightly or active work, girls are generally rated as more coltish (Saunders et al., 1999) and more likely to enjoy both dyadic fundamental interaction (Benenson, 1993) and smaller shirk groups than boys. Within dramatic or reverie play, the type of envisage play performed differs by gender. For example, girls use more verbal judgeing and choose variant play themes (Wall, Pickert, Gibson, 1989) and demonstrate little aggressive con tent (von Klitzing, Kelsay, Emde, Robinson, Schmitz, 2000). Girls fantasy themes tend to be complex and abstract. In contrast, boys play is more personally vigorous and they tend to choose simpler fantasy themes, such as performing superheroes (Pellegrini Bjorklund, 2004).Boys and girls as come up as differ in play with computers and video games. Boys generally play video games more frequently and for longer meter periods (Kafai, 1998), and they tend to play games in which competition is authorized. Girls like games with in-depth neighborly interactions and character development they calculate to enjoy combat-ready in a story more than participating in a competitive game (Salonius-Pasternak, 2005).AgeA childs age is related to both play skills and play preferences for the type and context of play. developmental transforms in play skill ask been found in a variety of studies of childrens play. For example, cause play freshman emerges in the midst of 1 and 2 old age of age and increases in prevalence and frequency throughout the preschool and kindergarten age (Fein, 1981). Play preferences attain been shown to begin early in life. Infant toy preferences are noted by mothers as early as 3 months of age, and by 1 year of age or so 90% of infants obligate a favorite object (Furby Wilke, 1982). Children have also demonstrated changes over epoch in their preference for specific forms of play, such as corporal play.In one study of physical play, the authors found that preference for all(prenominal) of three types of physical play peaks at a different age (Pellegrini Smith, 1998). Rhythmic stereotypes dominate during infancy, exercise play peaks during the preschool long time, and rough-and-tumble play is most common during middle childhood. Age also interacts with gender to walk out the choices. For example, the preferences of young children for gender-segregated groups begin to change in pre-adolescence (Brown, 1990), as do the gender-speci fic preferences for indoor and open-air(prenominal) play (Pellegrini, 1992). Age whitethorn be less of a work out in play development in children with disabilities (Sigafoos, Roberts-Pennell, Graves, 1999).Developmental Delay or DisabilityMultiple studies have demonstrated that children with physical disabilities play differently than children who are developing typically. Children with physical disabilities spend more time in resistless activities (Brown Gordon, 1987) and may demonstrate less active involvement with objects (Gowen, Johnson-Martin, Goldman, Hussey, 1992). Children with physical disabilities spend more time with adults than with their peers and participate more in passive activities, such as television watching, than in active and varied play experiences (Howard, 1996). In addition, children with physical disabilities, cerebral palsy in particular, may be less playful than their typically developing peers (Okimoto, Bundy, Hanzlik, 2000).Based on forward res earch, it is unclear whether children with disabilities have different play preferences or merely have an inability to access various forms of play. One study demonstrated that children with loco force disabilities held preferences corresponding to children without disabilities (Clifford Bundy, 1989). In a study investigating object play preferences in children with an autistic spectrum disorder, Desha, Ziviani, and Rodger (2003) found that the children (41 to 86 months old) engaged preponderantly in functional play and favored toys with salient sensori ride properties (toys that produced adept or movement with minimal effort). another(prenominal) research has suggested that children with autism prefer toys and play situations that are structured and predictable (Ferrara Hill, 1980).Contextual VariablesContextual factors may affect play occupations. Researchers have demonstrated that children have fairly stable preferences for play partners, including the gender of play part ners (Hay, Payne, Chadwick, 2004 Martin Fabes, 2001), play settings, and play objects (Knox, 1997). another(prenominal) studies suggest that the physical environment impacts childrens development of play occupations. For example, outdoor play provides children with opportunities for sensory exploration (e.g., in dirt, water, sand, and mud), learning about space, and vigorous physical activity. Indoor play offers opportunities for quiet play, cultivation, drawing, construction, and computer games (Clements, 2004).Research QuestionsThe literature on childrens play preferences suggests that children have clear preferences that are influenced by gender, age, and developmental status. Examining the current play choices and preferences of children is important to further understand the development of play occupations and what variables influence a childs play choices. This study investigated the play preferences of children with and without developmental delays who were between 3 and 7 historic period old. The specific research questions that guided our survey research were the following1. Do boys and girls differ in their play activity preferences?2. Do childrens play activity preferences differ by age in early childhood geezerhood?3. Do play activity preferences differ between children with developmental delays who go therapy go and children with typical development?MethodsSampleConvenience sampling was apply to recruit parents of children with typical development or with developmental delays (who received occupational, speech, or physical therapy services) who were between 3 and 8 days old to complete a survey describing play preferences. A total of 330 surveys were provided to parents of typically developing children and children with developmental delays in the Northeast and the Midwest regions in the United States. In the Midwest, participants were obtained through a large childcare center and dickens preschools. on the whole participants in the No rtheast were obtained through two large private exercising clinics. To obtain a smack of typically developing children in the Northeast, parents of children receiving therapy services in the clinics were asked to complete a survey for a sibling without developmental problems.InstrumentThe survey was based on Takatas instrument (Takata, 1969) that measures play preferences and the categories were special to reflect modern play activities. The survey regardd parents to respond to a list of play activity preferences for one of their children. Studies have demonstrated that mothers derriere accurately rank play activities (Tamis-LeMonda, Damast, Bornstein, 1994) and parent track has been used previously in research of childrens play preferences (Finegan, Niccols, Zacher, Hood, 1991).The survey listed play activities and contexts and asked parents to rate their childs preference for each activity and context. Parents were also asked to provide information about age, baulk statu s, and gender. The parents were asked about play preferences within a 3-month period because other researchers have suggested that play preferences remain relatively stable within this period of time (Finegan et al., 1991). Parents were not asked questions regarding their nationality, race, ethnicity, social class, or socioeconomic status because these factors have not been demonstrated to be related to play preferences (Meyer-Bahlburg et al., 1994). To pilot test the survey, two peer reviewers definitioned on the items and then six parents completed the survey and were asked to comment on its format and clarity and the amount of time it took to complete. Minimal revisions were do to improve clarity.The final survey listed 37 play activities in 11 categories of play and 11 contextual variables. The survey used a 4-point Likert cuticle for scoring, with each play activity rated from highly pet (4) to not preferable (1), and respondents could also select not applicable. Individua l activities were listed under broader categories (e.g., gain tug play, creative play, and pee-pee play). The second part of the survey asked for the childs preferences for specific play environments, including social context (e.g., friends or family) and physical contexts (e.g., inside or outside). A third section asked for descriptive information about the child (e.g., gender, redeem date, diagnosis, if any, and services received).Data AnalysisDemographic data and preference ratings were summarized apply descriptive statistics. Children were feature into age groups by year by go to the nearest year. Although specific diagnoses were determine for the children, the children were grouped into those with and without developmental delays for purposes of analysis. To reduce the data, the several(prenominal) activities were combine into play categories (e.g., gross motor, rough-and-tumble play, and make water play). The 33 activities were collapsed into 9 play categories and t he 11 contextual variables were collapsed into 4 play contexts. The figure identifies how the items were combined into categories.When computing mean scores, the responses not applicable and not pet were combined as a score of 1 because both responses indicated that the child did not engage in that play activity. Using each play household and play context, a three-way analysis of variance with gender, age, and disability status as the independent variables was computed. Scheffe post-hoc analyses were used to compare individual age groups. nitty-gritty sizes (Cohens d) were calculated for gender and developmental status comparisons. Although a Likert scale produces ordinal number data, parametric statistical procedures were selected over non-parametric statistical procedures based on research demonstrating that these statistics result in the same conclusions as non-parametric tests (Glass, Peckham, Sanders, 1972), they are preferable in most cases, and they do not increase the l ikelihood of a case I or Type II error (Nanna Sawilowsky, 1998 Rasmussen Dunlap, 1991). Use of parametric statistics allowed us to examine the interactions among the variables.ResultsSampleA total of 175 surveys were returned. just five surveys for 8 year olds were returned therefore these were omitted from the analysis. Of the 170 remaining, 166 were sufficiently complete to use in the analysis. Demographic data for the archetype are presented in tabulate 1.GenderThe three-way analysis of variance identified no crucial differences in play activity preferences between boys and girls (effect size regularize of mountainsd from .01 to .26). dodge 2 lists the mean scores, analysis of variance results, and effects sizes for the primary play categories. Play preferences were remarkably standardized for boys and girls, with equivalent preference for gross motor play, rough-and-tumble play, video and computer games, drawing and coloring, dolls, and pretend play. The interaction for gender and age was epochal for doll play preference. Three- to four-year-old boys favourite(a) play with dolls and action figurines more than 3- to 4-year-old girls. In contrast, 5- to 6-year-old boys preferred play with dolls and action figurines less than 5- to 6-year-old girls. Play contexts were also compared by gender. Boys (m = 2.03) and girls (m = 1.95) were evenly neutral about vie just (F 1,156 = .074 p = .786). Both boys (m = 2.63) and girls (m = 2.60) equally preferred to play with friends (F 1, 156 = .031 p = .860) and equally preferred indoor (mean range 2.73 to 2.80) and outdoor (mean range 2.75 to 2.86) play.Age GroupsPlay preferences were compared by age groups. Table 3 shows which play categories were importantly different for age groups between 3 and 7 years old. In this early childhood age span, changes in play preferences were few. Preference for rough-and-tumble play changed significantly from 3 to 7 years old. Rough-and-tumble play was preferred most at 5 years old and was only slimly preferred at 7 years old. Preference for video and computer games increased significantly in this age range. Video and computer game play was scored between not preferred and neutral at 3 years old and was somewhat preferred by 7 years old. Preference for drawing and coloring and construction increased from 3 to 7 years old, nevertheless these differences were not significant.Preference for pretend play differed significantly across the age groups, with low preference scores at the youngest and oldest ages and higher preference scores at 4 and 5 years old. shuttlecock and action figurine play was also highest at 4 years old however, changes in doll play preference were not significant across age groups. When play contexts were compared across the age groups, children showed no differences in preference for playing alone (range 1.88 to 2.23 F 4,156 = 1.3 p = .272) or with friends (range 2.27 to 2.93 F 4,156 = 1.95 p = .105) or for playing indoors ( range 2.35 to 2.86 F 4,153 = .793 p = .531) or outdoors (range 2.50 to 2.91 F 4,152 = 1.23 p = .300). The least preferred play context across all ages was alone.Children With and Without Developmental DelaysPlay preferences of children with developmental delays were compared to those of children with typical development. conceive scores, analysis of variance results, and effect sizes are presented in Table 4. Children in the delayed and non-delayed groups equally preferred gross motor play, but rough-and-tumble play was preferred more by children with developmental delays, demonstrating a restrained effect (d = .52). In the quiet play categories, typically developing children preferred drawing and coloring more than children with developmental delays. For drawing and coloring, there was also an interaction with gender preferences of boys with developmental delays (m = 2.57) were lower than those of boys with typical development (m = 3.42), but girls were equivalent in the two grou ps (developmental delays m = 3.13 typical development m = 3.19). In children with developmental delays, preference for doll and action figurine play was significantly less and preference for object exploration was slightly great than for children without developmental delays.Although pretend play did not differ in these groups, the interaction of age and developmental delay status for pretend play preference was significant. In young children (3 and 4 years old), those who were typically developing preferred pretend play this preference reversed by 7 years old when preferences of children with developmental delays were significantly higher than typically developing children for pretend play. Play preferences for these two groups of children are rank ordered in Table 5. The five most preferred play forms for children with typical development were gross motor, drawing and coloring, reading and watching television, construction, and rough-and-tumble play. The five most preferred play forms for children with developmental delays were rough-and-tumble play, gross motor, reading and watching television, drawing and coloring, and construction.Preferred play contexts also differed for the two groups. Although both groups were neutral about playing alone, children with developmental delays showed a lower preference for playing with friends (m = 2.29) than children with typical development (m = 2.93) (F 1,156 = 13.11 p DiscussionGender ComparisonsA surprising finding was that boys and girls held the same or similar play preferences. For example, we found no differences between boys and girls in doll and action figurine play or pretend play. In contrast, most of the research literature has concluded that boys and girls prefer different types of play. In older studies (Fagot, 1974, 1978 McDowell, 1937), girls and boys preferred different toys (i.e., girls preferred dolls and house toys, whereas boys preferred blocks and transportation toys). During the preschool and ea rly childhood years, boys are more likely to shoot fantasy and aggressive play (e.g., monsters or fighting) and girls are more likely to play house (Fein, 1981). One possible reason for our finding that boys and girls were similar in play preferences is that we broadly de exquisited doll play to take play with action figurines (e.g., Batman, Spiderman, and robots), which are considered boy toys. With dolls defined this broadly, boys and girls did not differ.In the research literature, pretend play is not the only play home where boys and girls differ. In two studies of children between 4 and 12 years old, boys preferred rough-and-tumble play and girls preferred quiet play (Finegan et al., 1991 Saracho, 1990). Saracho (1990) found that boys are more likely to prefer physical and block play over dramatic and manipulative play, and girls were the reverse. In a review of electronic play, Salonius-Pasternak (2005) describe that boys spend more time in video and computer game play tha n girls. Our study found no differences between boys and girls in preference for gross motor, rough-and-tumble play, or video game activities. Gym sets, trikes and bikes, and playgrounds were preferred play activities for both genders.When genders are compared, preferences of boys and girls were remarkably similar. Boys were slightly, but not significantly, higher than girls in rough-and-tumble play (d = .26), and other areas that differed in previous studies (e.g., preference for video and computer games and drawing and coloring) were equivalent. The equivocal results between our study and those that preceded it may be explained by their different methodologies (e.g., our survey used parent report and listed both boy and girl examples of the play categories). Gender differences may not exist when broad play categories are measured.Age ComparisonsWhen the ages of the children were compared, three categories showed significant differences across age groups. Rough-and-tumble play incr eased from 3 to 5 years old, and then decreased from 5 to 7 years old. As preference for rough-and-tumble play decreased, preference for video and computer games increased.Other researchers (Salonius-Pasternak, 2005) have documented the increase in computer game play, which begins at 7 years old and peaks in adolescence. As documented in the literature, pretend play increases during the preschool years (3 to 5 years old) and decreases after 6 years old (Fein, 1981), when rule-governed games begin to dominate play (Parham Primeau, 1997). Other categories showed expected trends, but differences among the age groups were not significant. Gross motor play (defined as bike, trike, tag, and gym set activities) did not decrease across the age groups and was consistently a highly preferred activity. Drawing and coloring, construction, watching television, and reading activities remained somewhat preferred throughout the age range.The development of play skills has been well documented by r esearchers (Rosenblatt, 1977 Takata, 1969) however, most research has focused on the first 2 to 3 years of life, which is when play skills change dramatically. Our study captured ages during which play preference is stable for certain forms of play and evolving for others. Takata (1969) conceptualized 4 to 7 years old as one play epoch. Dramatic role playing, social role playing, and realistic construction characterize this epoch. Play preferences appear to change substantially after 7 years old, which is when children prefer games with rules and social play in the context of bone upd games. Our findings regarding the effect of age on play preferences, which were significant but not dramatic, may reflect that our age range was essentially one play epoch (Takata, 1969).Differences Between Children With and Without Developmental DelaysIn our sample, children with developmental delays were primarily children with sensory integration dysfunction, autism, pervasive developmental disorde r, watchfulness deficit hyperactivity disorder, or general developmental delays. Children with these diagnoses often have motor planning difficulty, sensory processing problems, and social and communication limitations without frank motor, manipulation, and mobility impairments. The play preferences of children with developmental delays were consistent with the performance limitations associated with these development disorders.Children with developmental delays preferred rough-and-tumble play significantly more than children with typical development. This preference may reflect the sensory needs of children with autism, attention deficit hyperactivity disorder, pervasive developmental disorder, or sensory integration disorder. Rough-and-tumble play, such as wrestling and rough housing, provides children with deep tissue pressure and joint compression, which is the proprioceptive input that helps their systems organize and calm (Baranek, 2002 Blanche Schaaf, 2001). In addition, ro ugh-and-tumble play does not demand fine motor skills or precision performance it is play in which almost every child can participate and succeed.The other play division in our study preferred significantly more by children with developmental delays was object exploration. Object exploration reflects basic sensory motor play that predominates in children 1 to 3 years old and decreases during the preschool years as more skillful and emblematic play emerges. The higher preference by children with developmental delays probably reflects preference for simpler, lower demand play activities. In other play forms, typically developing children showed higher preference they preferred drawing and coloring and dolls and action figurines more than children with developmental delays. These play forms require fine motor and manipulative skills, and they require higher levels of cognitive ability, imagination, pretend, and understanding of symbols.In addition, the interaction of pretend play, ag e, and developmental delay was significant. At younger ages, pretend play was preferred more by children with typical development this reversed at older ages, when pretend play was preferred more by children with developmental delays. Therefore, the children with developmental delays developed an interest in pretend play at older ages, which is when interest by children with typical development was diminishing. This finding contrasts with that of Sigafoos et al. (1999), who found that children with disabilities did not exhibit play forms beyond sensorimotor and functional play. Our contrasting findings may be explained because the children in our sample were less severely involved.Both groups were neutral (mean range 1.81 to 2.45) for doll and action figurine play and pretend play. This neutral preference may reflect that the time spent in pretend play is minimal when compared to other play forms. Fein (1981) suggested that preschool children spend between 10% and 17% of their time in pretend play, which reflects only a small portion of boys and girls total play time. Sigafoos et al. (1999) observed that children with developmental delays spent 10% of their time in pretend play. When the types of play are rank ordered by preference, pretend play and doll and action figurine play have the lowest preference scores. many studies have documented differences in play when children with disabilities were compared to children without disabilities. Research demonstrates differences in play skills (Mogford, 1977), object and social play (Sigafoos et al., 1999), and playfulness (Clifford Bundy, 1989 Okimoto et al., 2000). Sigafoos et al. (1999) followed preschool children with developmental disabilities for 3 years and documented that they primarily engaged in exploratory (28%) and functional play (57%) and that these percentages did not change over time. Baranek, Reinhartsen, and Wannamaker (2001) described the play of children with autism as lacking(p) in imitation a nd imagination, containing fewer play repertoires, exhibiting decreased play organization, and exhibiting circumscribed social play. Their play tends to lack flexibility and creativity (Craig Baron-Cohen, 1999). Functional play seems to dominate in children with autism with minimal evidence of pretend or symbolic play (Libby, Powell, Messer, Jordan, 1998).Differences in children with sensory integration dysfunction have been identified by Parham and Mailloux (2005) and may be more subtle than the differences seen in autism (Desha et al., 2003). The play of children with sensory integration dysfunction is often limited in play scenarios because they avoid certain play experiences that cause sensory feedback discomfort and they have restricted action repertoires due to perceptual difficulties and dyspraxia (Knox, 2005 Parham Mailloux, 2005). Using a sample of preschool age children (4 to 6 years) with sensory integration dysfunction, Clifford and Bundy (1989) did not find signific ant differences in play materials preferences but did find differences in how the children used toys. Our sample with developmental delays, which included autism, sensory integration dysfunction, and attention deficit hyperactivity disorder, showed trends similar to the literature in that the children preferred simple play forms (i.e., object exploration and rough-and-tumble play) to more complex and skilled play forms (i.e., drawing and coloring and pretend play).When all play preference categories are ranked, the order of preference differed between groups, but the top five preferences were the same. The primary difference between the groups was in rough-and-tumble play (ranked first for children with developmental delays and fifth for children with typical development). Object exploration was the least preferred for children with typical development and dolls were least preferred for children with developmental delays.Consistent with the literature that describes problems in soci al play in children with developmental delays, children with typical development had significantly higher preferences for playing with friends (d = .57) than children with developmental delays. Playing alone was significantly more preferred in children with developmental delays. Response to these items may reflect the childs preference or may relate to actual play opportunities and experiences. Delays in communication and social interaction may create barriers for children with developmental delays to play with peers (Baranek et al., 2001 Tanta, 2004).Clinical ImplicationsThe findings of our study nurture the importance of physical play because, almost universally, the study participants enjoyed, and often preferred, physical play. At the same time, the participants balanced their preference for physical play with more sedentary play forms, such as reading, watching television, drawing and coloring, and construction. The range of preferences may indicate the need for relaxation as one aspect of play (Parham Primeau, 1997). Children seem to have broad and varied play preferences because 6 of the 11 play forms were rated as somewhat to highly preferred. Individual play preferences appear to be best defined by the player and cannot be assumed based on age, gender, or disability status.Of concern is the preference of children with developmental delays t