Parent’s Influences and Responses to Children’s Risk-taking in Outdoor Play
Introduction
Parents play an integral role in guiding their children in making crucial decisions in life, especially when it comes to risk taking. Although in most instances children depend on their direct experiences to react appropriately to risky situations it is apparent that parents also influence their ability to make sound decisions in such situations. When children are young most of these decisions are influenced by their parents since they control most of the activities they engage in. As children grow older, they start gaining independence in handling several tasks thus they take a greater responsibility for their decisions. Therefore, as they grow up, children are required to make more autonomous decision decisions based on various contexts in which risky conditions present themselves especially when they are engaged in outdoor play. Meanwhile, it is plausible to acknowledge that every risky situation that a child is faced with greatly affects the parents and different parents respond differently in supporting their children explore outdoor play regarding the perceived level of risk the child will be taking. In light of this, it becomes profound to evaluate parent’s influences as well as responses to their children’s risk taking in outdoor play. In addition, it is crucial to explore several other variables that influence the engagement of children in risky outdoor play such as their individual age, experience, temperament, parent socialization, parenting style, neighborhood amongst other individual, social and macro factors.
Problem Statement
Over the past few decades, research have set out to identify various factors that contribute to the parent’s decision either to allow their children participate in risky outdoor play or not. A scholars such as Maude (2009, p 46) conducted a study that explored the benefits of outdoor activity on a child’s physique, thus according to him, parents based their decisions on the perceived benefits. On the other hand, Park (2014, p 45) set out on a study that tried to identify the relationship between mother’s attitudes towards their children’s engagement to risky play, explaining how this attitude affects their permission levels for their children’s outdoor play. Eventually, after exploring most of these research studies, it is apparent that most of the studies focus on one aspect that influence parent’s behavior towards risky outdoor play for their children, overlooking the need to broadly investigate a pool of potential factors that combined influence these decisions. Additionally, these studies fail to offer a broader or exhaustive explanation of the factors that lead to different responses by parents towards their children’s bid to engage in risky and more challenging outdoor play. It is therefore imperative to conduct an extensive study that will fill this gap in research, offering a broader and insightful study of the parent’s influences and responses to children’s risk-taking in outdoor play.
Literature Review
Little, Wyver, and Gibson in 2011 conducted a study that aimed at explore how the play context and the attitudes of adults influenced children’s decision to engage in physically risky outdoor play. Little et al. (2011, p 114) acknowledged that naturally, children explore new and physically active play that present potential of engaging in injury-risk. In their study, Little et al. (2011, p 114) considered using semi-structured interviews together with naturalistic observations as they investigated the attitudes adults and especially parents had towards their children’s engagement in risky outdoor play situations. Furthermore, their study explored whether the experiences these children had in risky play was in any way influenced by the contexts under which they engaged their play. As they conducted the study, Little et al. realized that most of the parents and caregivers played an integral role in encouraging the young children in engaging in risky play as a profound aspect of development and learning. Furthermore, the study offered revelation in the influence of the context of the play on the children’s experiences of risky play where they found out that the different contexts offered limited opportunities for engagement in risky play. Regarding existing playgrounds which offer little opportunity for risky play, Little et al. (2011, p 129) suggested identification of minor adjustments that presented greater levels for positive risk taking, since large-scale modifications of such playgrounds would be excessively expensive. This study will be highly instrumental in this study since it offers a first-hand illustration of how parents respond to their children’s attempt to engage in risky outdoor play as well as ho they influence the decision of engaging in outdoor play.
Accordingly, Jenkins in 2006 conducted a study that asserted that it is impossible to fully shield children from engaging in risky outdoor play. In fact, Jenkins (2011, p 379) satirically points out that it is illogical to wrap these children up in cotton wool as a way of shielding them from risky outdoor play. In his study, Jenkins samples families in South Wales are and draws on semi-structured interviews to support his argument that parents have to consider several factors such as social expectations and their individual emotive or rational judgments in making decisions on which risky outdoor play activities their children should engage in. Contrary to their parent’s worries, young people depicted the feeling that engaging in outdoor activities that enhanced their exploration desires whether risky or not was their integral right.
Eventually, Jenkins (2006, p 391) learns that parents fail in their role to become effective and rational caregivers due to anxiety and paranoia. The paranoia that their children will be hurt in one way or the other when they engage fin outdoor activities has blinded parents’ ability to make a profound decision that will expose their children to potentially healthy outdoor activities. Basing the study on perceptions of parents on accident injury, the study found out that parents are often trying to wrestle with several cultural orientations that define what is healthy for their children. Additionally, the study indicated that although time has changed and families have become more and more private, most parents are worried that this extensive restriction to outdoor play imposed on their children may eventually affect their social and physical developments. Furthermore, when the advantages presented by outdoor participation are weighed against the worries for injury exposure, it was found that the benefits outweighed these worries. Therefore, it would be more imperative if parents are encouraged to allow their children to engage in outdoor recreation activities which will offer immense advantages to the children. Strategically, Jenkins (2006, p 392) interviewed parents whose children had been to hospital owing to injuries from outdoor physical exercises, and the motivating part is that most if these parents were more inclined in allowing their children to continue with the activities. Regardless of cultural viewpoints, these parents find it more beneficial if their children continued engaging in outdoor activities since according to most of them, their children’s bodies gained more endurance to overcome other forms of injuries. Jenkins’s study compliments this paper’s objective of exploring parent’s influences and responses to children’s risk-taking in outdoor play since it portrays how anxiety as one of the influences affects their decision-making process. Furthermore, the paper offers a better understanding of the considerations parents offer as responses to their children’s risky outdoor activities, basing on responses from parents whose children had suffered injuries from outdoor activities. These two aspects of the paper make it an indispensable source in this study.
On the other hand, Little and Eager (2010, p 497) in their study explored how play quality and the design of playgrounds impacted on the outdoor choices for risk taking by several children and their caregivers. Little and Eager (2010, p 497) utilized semi-structured interviews taking a sample of 13 girls and 25 boys from Sydney area in Australia. The study set out to examine their play preferences, concerning the available equipment, ultimately illustrating their tendency to engage in risky play. In order to engage in this study, Little and Eager had acknowledged that outdoor play for children offered a natural and imperative opportunity for their social, emotional and emotional development. They also cite that risk-averse society has further affected children’s ability to fully develop their prowess in outdoor activities and more so their physical development. Parents have become overly protective of their children, an aspect that has greatly supported the institutionalization of childhood. Following these issues that lead to institutionalization of childhood, Little, and Eager (2010, p 498) realized that risk and safety have become very hard to coexist. A distinction had to be drawn between risk and hazard to help parents and caregivers be able to understand each and incorporate risk-taking as a profound way of bringing up their children but on the other hand, avoid being complacent about safety issues. When parents understand the line that lies between risk and hazard, they will eventually adopt outdoor play activities, which will provide their children with opportunities to grow in a healthy way and develop intellectually.
The study conducted by Little and Eager (2010, p 511) concluded that it is integral to incorporate a variety of challenging play spaces and equipment, which will eventually attract children to take various challenges and engage in potentially positive risks. Furthermore, the study found out that parent’s worries about their children’s engagement in outdoor activities can be mitigated by offering equipment that assures them their children are safe from hazards. Exposing these children to managed risk levels is crucial since it makes the child develop skills to perceive and manage any risky environment he or she is presented to in the future; thus the child develops both intellectually and physically. Little and Eager’s study offers crucial insights in study of parent’s influences and responses to children’s risk-taking in outdoor play since it shows that the design of the playground and the equipment available highly influences the parent’s decision on their children’s engagement in outdoor activities. Furthermore, through a distinction of risks and hazards, the study aids in making imperative recommendations for the profound response to outdoor play activities that parents should consider.
Ethical Considerations
In every research project design it is imperative to consider ethical issues presented by the study. Every researcher should first identify the ethical considerations, then describe the importance of upholding the set ethical standards. Finally, in regard to the human subjects used in the study, the researcher should offer an insightful explanation of the ethical considerations he or she will duly consider in his/her study. Considering the researches explored above, it will be imperative to compare the ethical standards that every study considered. Starting with the study conducted by Little et al. (2011), they ensured that they adhered to the norms of conducting a study that prevented fabrication of data by conducting an actual primary research. The sample study was selected randomly eliminating any kind of bias. Any borrowed information was duly acknowledged by citing the authors of those works to avoid plagiarism which is academically illegal. Regarding subjects used to provide sensitive data for the research, anonymity was highly observed not to ruin their reputation or else place them on difficult situations.
On the other hand Little & Eager (2010, p 505) have a section that clearly explains the ethical consideration of the research. In the research, Little & Eager claims that they had to consider the line between positive risks and hazardous risks. In the study, children had to be exposed to risk-play environments and minimize the level of intervention to these activities. Otherwise, since they were dealing with human subjects in this study, it was ensured that these children were not exposed to environments here injury risk was high. Lastly, we find Jenkins (2006) whose research focused on the construction of positive risk in young people for them to access outdoor play. First, for authenticity purposes, Jenkins (2006) conducted primary research with 212 questionnaires that were successfully completed and returned. Furthermore, Jenkins backed his ideas with factual data from government organizations and other reputable institutions which were effectively referenced. Additionally, Jenkins ensured that he observed privacy for the subjects interviewed when he published his research paper.
This study will be conducted considering a sample of parents and children who will have to make decisions on outdoor play for their children. More so, children will have to engage in outdoor play so that responses from their parents can be observed and analyzed. When children are exposed to outdoor play, it will be the responsibility of their parents to ensure that they are safe and not prone to high risk areas. Furthermore, although the study will encourage or vouch for allowing children to engage in positive risk-play in the outdoor environment, it will ensure that these children are not exposed to any hazards in their outdoor play.
Research Methodology
There are often two types of research methodologies that can be adopted for any research study namely qualitative and quantitative methods. Qualitative research is that research that do not base its analysis on numerical data thus it is essentially descriptive in nature. On the other hand, quantitative research is that research which utilizes data which is in numerical form, then performs several kinds of analysis on the data to portray relationship of various data used. Starting with Little et al. (2011), the study utilized both qualitative and quantitative research methods. Numerical data on the frequency of occurrence of injuries was collected while on the other hand, responses from parents and teachers were highly considered in making conclusions. Mean and median analysis were some of the statistical analysis performed on collected data to develop various inferences. Consequently, Little & Eager (2010) also utilized both qualitative and quantitative research methods to conduct their research. Questionnaires which collected both numerical and explanatory information was used and this information was coded effectively. Lastly, Jenkins (2006) utilized pure qualitative research method through semi structured interviews with the subjects. The study features responses from parents of the children but numerical data was not considered.
This research will adopt both qualitative and quantitative research methods. Qualitative or else exploratory research will be essential in understanding the underlying theories regarding importance of outdoor physically intensive play for children. Furthermore, it will aid in understanding ideas from several other studies related to the topic. On the other hand, quantitate research will be crucial when it comes to analyzing factual data related to children outdoor play, frequency of injuries from such pay and reaction of parents. Additionally, it will be crucial in interpreting graphical and tabular representation of such data.
Data Collection and Analysis
This research will employ semi structured interviews with parents and children who will be the sample study. Interviews are integral in research since they offer first hand interaction with the study population, allowing the researcher to understand and structure his or her research questions in accordance to the environment. Additionally, data from hospital and schools will be used to understand the frequency of occurrence of accidents from children’s engagement in outdoor play and the reactions of their parents towards outdoor play after the events. Regarding data analysis, reports will be prepared, statistical tools used to provide visual pictures of data collected especially the relationships between various variables identified. Such analysis will involve regression analysis, correlation analysis, graphical representation, charts, and tables.
Conclusion
References
Jenkins, N. 2006. ‘You can't wrap them up in cotton wool!’ Constructing risk in young people's access to outdoor play. Health, Risk & Society, 8(4), pp.379-393.
Little, H. and Eager, D. 2010. Risk, challenge and safety: implications for play quality and playground design. European Early Childhood Education Research Journal, 18(4), pp.497-513.
Little, H., Wyver, S. and Gibson, F. 2011. The influence of play context and adult attitudes on young children's physical risk‐taking during outdoor play. European Early Childhood Education Research Journal, 19(1), pp.113-131.
Maude, P. (2009). Let's play out: How outdoor play develops physical literacy. Early Years Educator, 10(12), pp.46-52.
Park, S. (2014). Relationships among Mothers’ Attitudes toward Risks, their Degree of Permission for Young Children’s Risk-taking Play Behaviors, and Children’s Risk-taking Play Behaviors in Outdoor Play. The journal of Educational Studies, 45(2).
