Cargando…

Why We Move: Social Mobility Behaviors of Non-Disabled and Disabled Children across Childcare Contexts

BACKGROUND: Social mobility is defined as the co-occurrence of self-directed locomotion and direct peer interaction. Social mobility is a product of dynamic child–environment interactions and thus likely to vary across contexts (e.g., classroom, gymnasium, and playground). PURPOSE: The purpose of th...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Logan, Samuel W., Ross, Samantha Mae, Schreiber, Melynda A., Feldner, Heather A., Lobo, Michele A., Catena, Michele A., MacDonald, Megan, Galloway, James C.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Frontiers Media S.A. 2016
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5030269/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27709110
http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fpubh.2016.00204
_version_ 1782454646231531520
author Logan, Samuel W.
Ross, Samantha Mae
Schreiber, Melynda A.
Feldner, Heather A.
Lobo, Michele A.
Catena, Michele A.
MacDonald, Megan
Galloway, James C.
author_facet Logan, Samuel W.
Ross, Samantha Mae
Schreiber, Melynda A.
Feldner, Heather A.
Lobo, Michele A.
Catena, Michele A.
MacDonald, Megan
Galloway, James C.
author_sort Logan, Samuel W.
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Social mobility is defined as the co-occurrence of self-directed locomotion and direct peer interaction. Social mobility is a product of dynamic child–environment interactions and thus likely to vary across contexts (e.g., classroom, gymnasium, and playground). PURPOSE: The purpose of this present study was to examine differences in children’s social mobility: (1) across contexts by age and (2) between non-disabled and disabled children. METHOD: Participants (n = 55 non-disabled and three disabled children; M(age) = 3.1 years, SD = 1.4) were video recorded within a university-based early learning center. Children were recorded for 20 min in each context: classroom, gymnasium, and playground. A 15-s momentary time sampling method was used to code social mobility, the simultaneous occurrence of self-directed locomotion, and direct peer interaction. This variable was calculated as percent time within each context. RESULTS: A planned Friedman’s rank ANOVA (n = 55), stratified by age, indicated that older children (3–5 years old) differed across contexts in their social mobility [χ(2)(2) ~ 7.3–10.5, p < 0.025], whereas younger children (1–2 years old) were similar across contexts. Social mobility was significantly lower in the classroom compared with the playground and gymnasium (with no difference between the latter contexts) for older children. Visual analysis confirmed that disabled children (n = 3) engaged in substantially less time in social mobility (average 0–1%), compared with non-disabled, age-similar peers (2–3 years old average 1–12%) across all contexts. CONCLUSION: A substantial gap exists between non-disabled and disabled children for social mobility. There is an increase in magnitude and variability of social mobility around age three that suggests the gap between non-disabled and disabled children will continue to widen.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-5030269
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2016
publisher Frontiers Media S.A.
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-50302692016-10-05 Why We Move: Social Mobility Behaviors of Non-Disabled and Disabled Children across Childcare Contexts Logan, Samuel W. Ross, Samantha Mae Schreiber, Melynda A. Feldner, Heather A. Lobo, Michele A. Catena, Michele A. MacDonald, Megan Galloway, James C. Front Public Health Public Health BACKGROUND: Social mobility is defined as the co-occurrence of self-directed locomotion and direct peer interaction. Social mobility is a product of dynamic child–environment interactions and thus likely to vary across contexts (e.g., classroom, gymnasium, and playground). PURPOSE: The purpose of this present study was to examine differences in children’s social mobility: (1) across contexts by age and (2) between non-disabled and disabled children. METHOD: Participants (n = 55 non-disabled and three disabled children; M(age) = 3.1 years, SD = 1.4) were video recorded within a university-based early learning center. Children were recorded for 20 min in each context: classroom, gymnasium, and playground. A 15-s momentary time sampling method was used to code social mobility, the simultaneous occurrence of self-directed locomotion, and direct peer interaction. This variable was calculated as percent time within each context. RESULTS: A planned Friedman’s rank ANOVA (n = 55), stratified by age, indicated that older children (3–5 years old) differed across contexts in their social mobility [χ(2)(2) ~ 7.3–10.5, p < 0.025], whereas younger children (1–2 years old) were similar across contexts. Social mobility was significantly lower in the classroom compared with the playground and gymnasium (with no difference between the latter contexts) for older children. Visual analysis confirmed that disabled children (n = 3) engaged in substantially less time in social mobility (average 0–1%), compared with non-disabled, age-similar peers (2–3 years old average 1–12%) across all contexts. CONCLUSION: A substantial gap exists between non-disabled and disabled children for social mobility. There is an increase in magnitude and variability of social mobility around age three that suggests the gap between non-disabled and disabled children will continue to widen. Frontiers Media S.A. 2016-09-21 /pmc/articles/PMC5030269/ /pubmed/27709110 http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fpubh.2016.00204 Text en Copyright © 2016 Logan, Ross, Schreiber, Feldner, Lobo, Catena, MacDonald and Galloway. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) or licensor are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.
spellingShingle Public Health
Logan, Samuel W.
Ross, Samantha Mae
Schreiber, Melynda A.
Feldner, Heather A.
Lobo, Michele A.
Catena, Michele A.
MacDonald, Megan
Galloway, James C.
Why We Move: Social Mobility Behaviors of Non-Disabled and Disabled Children across Childcare Contexts
title Why We Move: Social Mobility Behaviors of Non-Disabled and Disabled Children across Childcare Contexts
title_full Why We Move: Social Mobility Behaviors of Non-Disabled and Disabled Children across Childcare Contexts
title_fullStr Why We Move: Social Mobility Behaviors of Non-Disabled and Disabled Children across Childcare Contexts
title_full_unstemmed Why We Move: Social Mobility Behaviors of Non-Disabled and Disabled Children across Childcare Contexts
title_short Why We Move: Social Mobility Behaviors of Non-Disabled and Disabled Children across Childcare Contexts
title_sort why we move: social mobility behaviors of non-disabled and disabled children across childcare contexts
topic Public Health
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5030269/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27709110
http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fpubh.2016.00204
work_keys_str_mv AT logansamuelw whywemovesocialmobilitybehaviorsofnondisabledanddisabledchildrenacrosschildcarecontexts
AT rosssamanthamae whywemovesocialmobilitybehaviorsofnondisabledanddisabledchildrenacrosschildcarecontexts
AT schreibermelyndaa whywemovesocialmobilitybehaviorsofnondisabledanddisabledchildrenacrosschildcarecontexts
AT feldnerheathera whywemovesocialmobilitybehaviorsofnondisabledanddisabledchildrenacrosschildcarecontexts
AT lobomichelea whywemovesocialmobilitybehaviorsofnondisabledanddisabledchildrenacrosschildcarecontexts
AT catenamichelea whywemovesocialmobilitybehaviorsofnondisabledanddisabledchildrenacrosschildcarecontexts
AT macdonaldmegan whywemovesocialmobilitybehaviorsofnondisabledanddisabledchildrenacrosschildcarecontexts
AT gallowayjamesc whywemovesocialmobilitybehaviorsofnondisabledanddisabledchildrenacrosschildcarecontexts