Social Nonsocial Play (1)

8/12/2019 Social Nonsocial Play (1)

1/30

Social and Nonsocial Play

Robert J. Coplan a, Kenneth H. Rubin b, & Leanne C. Findlay a

a Carleton University b University of Maryland

In D.P. Fromberg & D. Bergen (Eds.), Play from birth to twelve (2 nd edition). New York:

Garland.


2/30

2

Social and Nonsocial Play

In this chapter, we distinguish between structural and contextual features of play, broadly

defined. For example, from a structural perspective, theorists have distinguished among

functional, constructive, and dramatic behaviors, as well as games-with-rules (e.g., Piaget, 1962;

Smilansky, 1968). These structural forms of play occur in a variety of social contexts . In this

essay we examine both ends of the social participation spectrum, exploring both social play

(activities that take place when two or more partners interact with one another in both literal and

non-literal fashions) and nonsocial play (solitary activities in the presence of peers). We define

both social and non-social play and address questions such as, Why are these forms of behavior

of developmental significance?; How does one assess social and nonsocial play?"; and "What

are the predictors, concomitants, and outcomes associated with individual differences in social

and nonsocial play?". It is argued herein that social play provides a unique and important

context for young children's social, social-cognitive, and emotional development, and that some

forms of nonsocial play can reflect psychosocial maladaptation, whereas others may be

developmentally benign.

Defining social and nonsocial play

Rubin, Fein and Vandenberg (1983) defined play in terms of the following

characteristics: (1) Play is not governed by appetitive drives, compliance with social demands, or

by inducements external to the behavior itself; instead play is intrinsically motivated; (2) play is

spontaneous, free from external sanctions, and its goals are self-imposed; (3) play asks "What

can I do with this object or person?" (this differentiates play from exploration which asks "What

is this object /person and what I do with it/him/her?"); (4) play is not a serious rendition of an

activity or a behavior it resembles; instead it consists of activities that can be labelled as pretense


3/30

3

(i.e., play must comprise non-literality); (5) play is free from externally imposed rules (this

distinguishes play from games-with-rules; and (6) play involves active engagement (this

distinguishes play from daydreaming, lounging, and aimless loafing).

Given these definitional criteria, we admit that the following discussion of social and

nonsocial play spreads well beyond the boundaries of the above-noted definition. Nevertheless,

our terminology is accepted in the current Zeitgeist of research pertaining to play, and we will

return to the original definitional criteria during the course of this chapter.

To state the obvious, that which distinguishes social play from other forms of play

involves the notion of interaction with others. Social play occurs among dyads and larger groups.

It occurs when the child (a) is motivated to engage others in playful activities; (b) is able to

regulate emotional arousal; (c) possesses the skills necessarily to initiate interactions with

another child, such that; (d) the social overtures are accepted in kind. Accordingly, social play

compromises the associated constructs of social participation, social competence, and sociability,

and typically involves two (or more) children participating in functional-sensorimotor,

constructive, and dramatic activities, and games-with-rules. It also comprises active

conversations between children as they go about interacting with each other, negotiating play

roles and game rules.

In contrast, for the purposes of this chapter, nonsocial play is defined as the display of

solitary activities and behaviors in the presence of other potential play partners . An important

component of this definition involves the presence of other people, which infers the opportunity

to engage in social interaction and group-oriented play. Thus, from this perspective, a child who

is playing quietly alone in his/her room at home would not be engaging in nonsocial play, per se,

as there are no play partners in the immediate vicinity.


4/30

4

Social participation. In the 1920's, several attempts were made to develop

comprehensive taxonomies for describing children's social interactions with peers. Andrus

(1924) and Verry (1923), for example, systematically observed nursery school children and

created various categories to categorize social and nonsocial play. Verry (1923) included the

categories of 'treating playmates as objects' and 'cooperating within the group' within her various

types of social attitudes. A few years later, Bott (1928) developed a coding scheme which

included the category of occupied with other children. Within this category, the behaviors of

talking, watching, interference, imitation, and cooperation were distinguished.

Parten's (1932) observational framework is perhaps the best known of the early social

participation taxonomies. In her now classic study, Parten defined two categories of socially

interactive play. During associative play , the child interacts with other children and may be

using similar materials, however, there is no real cooperation or division of labour. Cooperative

play consists of a group activity organized for the purpose of carrying out some plan of action or

attaining some goal. Play partners coordinate their behaviors and take particular roles in pursuit

of the common goal. In studies postdating the 1970s, associative play and cooperative play were

combined as social play .

Parten also defined four categories comprising nonsocial or " semi "-social play activities.

These included: (1) Unoccupied behavior -- the demonstration of a marked absence of focus or

intent (e.g., child stares blankly into space or wanders aimlessly); (2) Onlooker behavior -- the

observation of others activities without an attempt to enter into the peers' activity; (3) Solitary

play -- playing apart from other children (at a distance greater than three feet) and paying little or

no attention to others; and (4) Parallel play -- the child plays beside (i.e., within 3 feet) but not

with other children.


5/30

5

The legacy of Parten's (1932) taxonomy of social participation is that is continues to be

used in studies that bear no striking resemblance to those originally published in the 1930s.

Contemporary researchers have refined the original scale for purposes of examining

developmental, cultural, and individual differences in children's social and nonsocial play,

broadly defined.

The developmental significance of social play

Theorists have been positing the developmental significance of peer interaction for over

fifty years (see Rubin, Coplan, Chen, Buskirk, & Wojslawowicz, in press, for a recent review).

The early work of Piaget (e.g., 1926, 1932), Mead (1934) and Sullivan (1953) emphasized the

importance of peer involvement for childrens social development. Piaget suggested that peer

interaction provides children with an important and unique learning environment. In particular,

exposure to instances of interpersonal differences of opinion and thought with ones peers (as

opposed to interactions with adults), and opportunities for discussion and negotiation about these

differences, were viewed as aiding children in the acquisition and development of sensitive

perspective-taking skills in interpersonal relationships.

Mead (1934) echoed Piaget's emphasis on the importance of the development of

perspective-taking through peer interaction; however, he also stressed the significance of peer

interaction in the development of the self-system. In particular, Mead believed that exchanges

among peers, in the contexts of cooperation, competition, conflict, and friendly discussion,

allowed the child to gain an understanding of the self as both subject and object. According to

the notion of the looking glass self, Mead suggested that children experienced themselves

indirectly through the responses of their peers. Finally, Sullivan (1953) proposed that peer

relationships are essential for the development of skills for cooperation, compromise, empathy


6/30

6

and altruism. Sullivan emphasized the importance of 'chumships', or special relationships, for the

emergence of these concepts. The underlying thread connecting these theorists is the emphasis

on experiences within the peer group, and its role in the acquisition, maintenance, and practice of

important social skills.

It was assumed that peer interaction and particularly social play, as defined above, was of

developmental significance. Researchers have long since provided support for this conjecture

(e.g., Azmitia, Lippman, & Ittel, 1999; Hogan & Tudge, 1999; Rogoff, 1997). These theoretical

positions and the empirical support of them take on somewhat different meaning when one

ponders the question, What about those who rarely engage others in social play?. We address

this question below.

Assessing social and nonsocial play

There currently exist many different measures designed to assess social and nonsocial

play and its related constructs. These measures can be characterized in terms of the source of

information regarding children's play behaviors: (a) outside sources; and (b) direct observation.

Outside source assessments. Outside source assessment procedures involve asking

"expert" informants, such as peers, parents, and teachers, to rate or nominate children's social

inclinations. There are several advantages to using paper-and-pencil rating scales or nomination

techniques. To begin with, outside source assessment is comparatively quick and inexpensive.

As well, parents, classmates and teachers have the potential to observe children in many different

circumstances and for long periods of time; thus, they can make inferences about specific

children's "everyday" behaviors.

The disadvantage of outside source observation methods center on the use of untrained

observers for the purpose of data collection. There may be some bias in their ratings of the


7/30

7

children's characteristic social behavior patterns. More importantly, however, because they are

untrained, they may not be able to identify specific and detailed aspects of behaviors. This may

be particularly germane when assessing social and nonsocial play, as distinctions are made

between very fine-grained components of behaviors.

Perhaps as a result, although there are a plethora of measures designed to examine related

constructs (i.e., children's social competence, personality, temperament, classroom behaviors),

there are relatively few teacher and parent rating scale measures designed specifically to assess

social and nonsocial play. In the last few years, several measures have evolved, including the

Preschool Play Behavior Scale (Coplan & Rubin, 1998), the Penn Interactive Peer Play Scale

(Fantuzzo, Coolahan, Mendez, McDermott, & Sutton-Smith, 1998), and the Teacher Behavior

Rating Scale (Hart et al, 2000). However, the most common method used to assess young

childrens social and nonsocial play has been through the use of direct behavioral observations.

Direct observations. Direct observation techniques involve the systematic recording of

children's behaviors. There are several advantages of observational techniques. First, the

behaviors observed are face valid. Second, 'blind' observers reduce biases in the coding process.

That is, coders are not influenced by their past knowledge of a child's behaviors. Finally, coders

can be trained to observe and record very specific and detailed behaviors.

Disadvantages of observational techniques included obvious costs in time and personnel.

Also, coders may be limited in the contexts, settings, and time frames during which they can

observe behavior. Methodological advances in both time- and event-sampling techniques,

however, have increased the generalizibility of direct observational techniques.

There currently exist several observational coding schemes designed to assess social and

nonsocial play and their related constructs (see Gitlin-Weiner, Sandgrund, & Schaefer, 2000, for


8/30

8

a review). The social aspects of children's play have been investigated using time sampling (e.g.,

Spinrad et al., 2004); event samples (e.g., Harrist, Zaia, Bates, Dodge & Pettit, 1997)); and scan

samples (e.g., Ladd & Profilet, 1996). These coding schemes have been employed to observe

social and nonsocial play in laboratory playrooms (e.g., Rubin, Cheah, & Fox, 2001), classrooms

(e.g., Coplan, Gavinski-Molina, Lagace-Seguin, & Wichmann, 2001), and on the playground

(e.g., Hart, 1993). In our work, we have made frequent use of the Play Observation Scale (POS,

Rubin, 2001). This measure is described in more detail below.

The Play Observation Scale . The Play Observation Scale (POS , Rubin, 2001) was

developed in the 1970s to allow observations to be made of the structural components of play

(as defined by Piaget, 1932 and Smilansky, 1968) as they were nested in the social participation

contexts described by Parten (1932). Early work focused on developmental, normative

observations of preschool, kindergarten, and elementary school children during free play (e.g.,

Rubin, Hymel, & Mills, 1989; Rubin & Krasnor, 1980; Rubin, Maioni, & Hornung, 1976;

Rubin, Watson, & Jambot, 1978). The POS employs a time sampling methodology within which

10 second segments are coded for both social participation (e.g., solitary, parallel, group) and the

cognitive quality of children's play (e.g., functional-sensorimotor, constructive, dramatic, games-

with-rules). Several additional free play behaviors are assessed, including instances of

unoccupied behavior, onlooking, exploration, peer conversation, anxious behaviors, hovering,

transitional behavior, rough-and-tumble play, and aggression. The POS coding taxonomy is

illustrated in Figure 1.

--- insert Figure 1 about here ---

The use of the POS in our laboratories (e.g., Coplan, Bowker, & Cooper, 2003; Coplan et

al., 2001; Coplan, Prakash, ONeil, & Armer, 2004; Rubin, Burgess, & Hastings, 2002; Rubin,


9/30


10/30

10

Indeed, play patterns are also influenced by the cultures within which children live. In this

regard, the display of social play and different forms of nonsocial play can be considered marker

variables for psychosocial adjustment in childhood.

Temperament and biological influences. There is growing support for a link between

biology and social play. This link can be accessed through the study of temperamental

characteristics that serve as biologically-based precursors to the display of different play styles.

For example, Kagan (e.g., Kagan, Reznick, & Snidman, 1999; Kagan & Saudino, 2001) has

distinguished between inhibited and uninhibited children. The former group can be characterized

as being quiet, hypervigilant, and restrained while they experience novel situations. The latter

group, alternatively, reacts with spontaneity, as if they do not distinguish between novel and

familiar situations. Inhibited children, compared to their uninhibited counterparts, have higher

and more stable heart rates, larger pupil diameters, greater motor tension, and higher levels of

morning cortisol (see Sanson, Hemphill, & Smart, 2004, for a recent review). These data are

viewed as supporting the notion that inhibited children have a biologically predispositioned low

threshold for arousal in the face of novelty.

Several researchers have argued that physiological mechanisms of emotional regulation are

important components of children's dispositions to engage others in interactions or to withdraw

from them (e.g., Eisenberg, Shepard, Fabes, Murphy, & Guthrie, 1998; Fabes, Hanish, Martin, &

Eisenberg, 2002; Gunnar, Sebanc, Tout, Donzella, & van Dulmen, 2003; Henderson et al.,

2004). These physiological mechanisms include patterns of hemispheric imbalance (as measured

by EEG activation) and vagal tone (a measure of parasympathetic control over heart rate) (Fox,

Rubin, Calkins, Marshall, Coplan, Porges, & Long, 1995; Schmidt, Calkins, Rubin, & Coplan,

1995; Porges & Doussard-Roosevelt, 1997; Schmidt & Schulkin, 1999). For example, Fox and


11/30

11

colleagues (2001) found that stable inhibited children displayed greater right frontal EEG

activity at 9 months and 4 years of age than did the uninhibited group, and were also rated more

fearful, shy and less sociable by their mothers. By comparison, a group of children who

displayed inhibited behavior at 4 months of age but whose behavior was not consistent over time

(i.e., who were no longer reportedly inhibited at 24 or 48 months of age) did not show such EEG

assymetry. These findings suggest a strong role of brain over-activity in social behavior, namely

anxiety in social situations.

Parental Influences. Other influences on children's inclinations to engage primarily in

social or nonsocial play are parent-child relationships and parenting behaviors. Conceptually,

psychologists have predicted that when insecure anxious-resistant (C) children find

themselves in group settings with peers, they should attempt to avoid rejection through the

demonstration of passive, adult-dependent behavior and withdrawal from social interaction

(Renken, Egeland, Marvinney, Sroufe, & Mangelsdorf, 1989; Sroufe & Waters, 1977).

Empirical, support derives from data indicating that infants who experience an anxious-resistant

(C) attachment relationship appear to be socially withdrawn at age seven years (Renken et al.,

1989). Additional support for both concurrent and predictive associations between insecure

attachment and social withdrawal comes from more recent studies (e.g., Booth, Rose-Krasner,

McKinnon, & Rubin, 1994; Rubin, Booth, Rose-Krasnor, & Mills, 1995).

Precursors to social play are also predicted by the parent-child attachment relationship in

infancy. For example, secure attachment status in infancy is predictive in early childhood of

more elaborate play styles, more positive social engagement, and less behavioral inhibition than

insecure attachment relationships (e.g., Burgess, Marshall, Rubin, & Fox, 2003; Rose-Krasner,


12/30


13/30

13

characteristics, parental socialization practices, and the quality of relationships within and outside the

family (e.g., Rubin & Burgess, 2002; Rubin & Lollis, 1988; Rubin & Mills, 1991).

Results from several recent studies have suggested that these transactional processes are critical

factors in determining peer-related outcomes (Rubin et al., 2002; Rubin et al., 1999; Spangler &

Schieche, 1998). For instance, Spangler and Schieche (1998) found that insecurely attached infants who

were behaviorally inhibited had higher salivary cortisol levels, indicating that it is a combination of

attachment and temperament that leads to changes in physiological stimulation during a novel situation.

Rubin and colleagues (2002) also found an interaction between temperament and parenting in predicting

childrens play behavior. Dispositionally-based behavioral inhibition at two years predicted socially

reticent behavior at four years for only those children whose mothers were overprotective and intrusive.

Developmental outcomes of social and nonsocial play

Social play and adjustment. Returning to our earlier discussion of play, it is of

significant note that social pretense, or sociodramatic play, has generally been regarded as a

marker of social competence, positive adjustment, and well-being during the period of early

childhood (e.g., Howes, 1992, Rubin et al., 1983; Rubin et al., 1998). The frequent production of

sociodramatic play during the preschool and kindergarten years is associated with the

development of language skills, early literacy, creativity, theory of mind, self-regulation, and

school achievement (e.g., Elias & Berk, 1993 ; Levy, Wolfgang, & Koorland, 1992; Schwebel,

Rosen, & Singer, 1999; Singer & Lythcott, 2002)

There have been relatively few longitudinal studies of the developmental course of

children's social play, broadly defined. An exception to this was the Waterloo Longitudinal

Project (WLP), initiated originally in 1980 to examine the stability and predictive outcomes of


14/30

14

childrens social and nonsocial play (e.g., Rubin, 1982, 1985; Rubin et al., 1989; Rubin, Hymel,

Mills, & Rose-Krasner, 1991; Rubin, Chen, & Hymel, 1993; Rubin et al., 1995).

Results from the WLP indicated that social play is relatively stable from preschool

through to adolescence (e.g., Rubin, 1993; Rubin & Both, 1989; Rubin et al., 1989). Moreover,

observed social play in early childhood predicted positive feelings of self worth and was

negatively associated with feelings of loneliness in late chidhood (e.g., Rubin et al., 1989).

Similar results were found following the participants into adolescence. Rubin and colleagues

(1995) followed a sample of children from the WLP into high school (age 14 years). Results

indicated that an aggregate of observed social play and peer rated social competence at age 7

years significantly predicted higher self regard and felt group security, and lower self-reported

loneliness in adolescence.

Overall, social play is generally associated with social adjustment. However, there is

some evidence to suggest that the frequent display of social play, in and of itself, does not

"guarantee" social adjustment. For example, Rubin et al. (1995) found that social play in early

childhood was not only predictive of positive outcomes in adolescence, but also predicted

deviant behaviors (i.e., drug and alcohol use).

Childrens emotion regulation appears to play a key role here. Whereas the ability to

regulate negative emotions is related to social competence and peer acceptance (e.g., Eisenberg,

Spinrad, Fabes, Reiser, et al., 2004; Eisenberg, Pidada, & Liew, 2001) the inability to regulate

affect is associated with socially incompetent behavior (e.g., Calkins, Gill, Johnson, & Smith,

1999). More specifically, Rubin, Coplan, Fox, and Calkins (1995) found that an extreme group

of socially interactive preschoolers who were also emotionally dysregulated (i.e.,

temperamentally highly reactive and difficult to soothe), were rated by mothers as having more


15/30

15

externalizing problems than comparison groups of extremely socially-interactive but well-

regulated children and average children. Thus, not all young children who display a high

frequency of social play grow up to be competent, well adjusted, teenagers.

Nonsocial play and adjustment. It had been previously accepted that noninteractive

children are at risk for later maladjustment difficulties in later childhood and adolescence (see

Rubin, Burgess, Kennedy, & Stewart, 2003, for a review). However, results from recent research

indicate that the relations between nonsocial play types and psychosocial adjustment in

childhood are quite complex. In fact, different forms of nonsocial play appear to reflect different

underlying psychological mechanisms, and are associated with decidedly difference outcomes.

To begin with, reticent behavior (i.e., onlooking behaviors and being unoccupied) is

thought to indicate temperamental shyness and social fearfulness (e.g., Coplan et al., 1994). A

child frequently displaying reticent behavior is thought to be caught in an approach-avoidance

conflict (Asendorpf, 1990), wanting to engage in social interactions with peers but

simultaneoulsy desiring to avoid others because of a fear of social interaction.

There is strong emprirical support for this conceptualization. To begin with, the display

of reticent behavior in childhood has been related a constellation of psychophysiological

variables (e.g., greater right frontal EEG activation, higher levels of morning cortisol) that

similarly underlie the construct of behavioral inhibition (e.g., Henderson et al., 2004; Schmidt,

Fox, Rubin, & Sternberg, 1997). Moreover, reticent behavior in childhood has also been

associated with temperamental shyness, the overt display of anxious behaviors, internalizing

problems, social incompetence, low self-worth, and peer exclusion (Coplan, 2000; Coplan,

Findlay, & Nelson, 2004; Coplan et al., 1994; Coplan et al., 2001; Coplan et al., 2004; Coplan &


16/30

16

Rubin, 1998; Fox et al., 2001; Hart et al., 2000; Henderson et al., 2004; Rubin et al., 2002; Rubin

et al., 1995).

In constrast, solitary-active play (i.e., solitary-functional and solitary-dramatic play) is

thought to reflect social immaturity and impulsiveness (Rubin, 1982). Although it occurs rather

infrequently during free play (approximately 3% of the time), Rubin (1982) speculated that

solitary-active behavior is quite negatively salient to the peer group, even in early childhood, and

that children who engage in solitary-active behaviors are actually playing along because they are

being isolated by others. In support of this notion, solitary-active behavior in childhood has been

associated with peer rejection, poor social problem-solving, impulsivity, externalizing problems,

and academic difficulties (Coplan, 2000; Coplan et al., 1994; Coplan, Wichmann, & Lagace-

Seguin, 2001; Coplan & Rubin, 1998; Rubin, 1982).

It is interesting to note here is that the same structural form of social play can have very

different meanings when displayed in different contexts. Thus, as mentioned earlier, although

sociodramatic play (group pretense) is generally viewed as a index of social competence and

social adjustment, solitary -dramatic behavior, in the presence of peers, appears to reflect

impulsivity and social immaturity; it is also associated with externalizing (or acting-out)

problems in early childhood.

Finally, solitary-passive play (i.e., solitary-exploratory and solitary-constructive play) has

been generally thought to reflect unsociability, or a preference for playing alone (Rubin &

Asendorpf, 1993). Children who frequently display solitary-passive behaviors are thought to

possess the necessary skills to interact socially, but not to evidence a strong desire for peer play

(Rubin, 1982). Empirical support for this characterization came from a series of studies

indicating that solitary-passive behavior (in early childhood) was not associated with indices of


17/30

17

psychosocial maladaptation (e.g., Coplan, 2000; Coplan et al., 1994; Coplan & Rubin, 1998;

Rubin, 1982; Rubin et al., 1995).

However, results from recent studies have called into question the meaning of solitary-

passive play in early childhood (e.g., Lloyd & Howe, 2003; Spinrad et al., 2004). For example,

Coplan and colleagues (2001) reported that observed solitary-passive play in kindergarteners

was associated with temperamental shyness and indices of maladjustment for boys but not girls.

Coplan and colleagues (2004) found that although children rated as unsociable were less often

observed to initiate social interactions with peers and were viewed by teachers as more socially

withdrawn, they were not significantly more likely to display solitary-passive behavior.

Thus, there is evidence to suggest that solitary-passive play itself may have varying

psychological and emotional meanings, and may be frequently displayed by different types of

children for different reasons. Direct evidence for this has been provided by Henderson et al.

(2004). In a longitudinal study, they found that a subset of preschool children who displayed

frequent solitary-passive play had lower resting heart period and were more likely to have been

shy and inhibited when they were toddlers. This suggests that some children who frequently

displayed solitary-passive behavior tended to be shy, but coped sufficiently with their approach-

avoidance conflicts in order to at least play quietly in the presence of peers. In contrast, other

children who frequently displayed solitary-passive play had a higher resting heart period and

were neither previously shy nor inhibited as toddlers. Thus, some children who display frequent

solitary-passive play do not appear to be anxious or distressed. Further research is clearly

required in this area, particularly to explore the long term longitudinal outcomes associated with

this type of nonsocial play.

Summary and Future Directions


18/30

18

The goal of this essay was to explore the constructs of young children's social and

nonsocial play within the context of peer interactions. Clearly, social play provides children with

a unique and important environment for development. Through social play and associated

interactions with peers, children are exposed to a domain where they can acquire important

social-cognitive and interpersonal skills. Social play allows children to acquire an understanding

of other children's perspectives, and leads to a greater understanding of cooperation, negotiation,

and conflict resolution. Moreover, children who experience a consistently impoverished quality

of social play and social interaction are at risk for later social maladjustment. Thus, social play

can be construed as representing a "safe-haven" for children to learn about themselves and

others, and to acquire skills and knowledge that will assist them throughout their lifetimes.

In contrast, the different forms of nonsocial play appear to have different meanings and

are associated with different outcomes. Some children appear to play alone (displaying reticent

behavior) because they are shy and anxious, lacking in social competence, and experiencing

internalizing problems. Other children seem to play alone (displaying solitary-active behavior)

because they are immature, impulsive, and excluded by peers, and display externalizing

problems. Finally, although some children likely play alone because of a lack of interest in social

interaction, such children may not display a particular type of nonsocial play.

Additional longitudinal work should explore the meanings and implications of social and

nosocial play into middle childhood and adolescence. Moreover, a deeper understanding is

required of the role of childrens relationships (i.e., with parents and peers) in the developmental

trajectories associated with the frequent display of social or nonsocial play. Finally, the vast

majority of research related to social and nonsocial play has been conducted in Western cultures.


19/30

19

There is likely significant cultural variation in the meanings of different forms of solitude. Thus,

there are many avenues for future researchers to explore related to the nature and outcomes of


20/30

20

References

Andrus, R. (1924). A tentative inventory of the habits of children from two to four years of age.

Columbia University, Teachers College, Contributions to Education, No. 160.

Asendorpf, J. B. (1990). Beyond social withdrawal: shyness, unsociability and peer

avoidance. Human Development, 33 , 250-259.

Azmitia, M., Lippman, D. N., & Ittel, A. (1999). On the relation of personal experience

to early adolescents' reasoning about best friendship deterioration. Social Development,

8 , 275-291.

Baumrind, D. (1967). Child care patterns anteceding three patterns of preschool behavior.

Genetic Psychology Monographs, 75 , 43-88.

Baumrind, D. (1971). Current patterns of parental authority. Developmental Psychology

Monographs, 4 , (No. 1, Pt. 2).

Baumrind, D. (1991). To nurture nature. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 14 , 386.

Bott, H. (1928). Observation of play activities of three- year-old children. Genetic Psychology

Monographs, Vol. 4 , 44-88.

Booth, C. L., Rose-Krasnor, L., McKinnon, J., & Rubin, K. H. (1994). Predicting social

adjustment in middle childhood: The role of preschool attachment security and maternal

style. Social Development, 3 , 189-204.

Burgess, K. B., Marshall, P. J., Rubin, K. H., & Fox, N. A. (2003). Infant attachment and

temperament as predictors of subsequent externalizing problems and cardiac physiology.

Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry and Allied Disciplines, 44 , 819-831.


21/30

21

Calkins, S. D., Gill,, K. L., Johnson, M. C., & Smith, C. L. (1999). Emotional reactivity and

emotional regulation strategies as predictors of social behavior with peers during

toddlerhood. Social Development, 8 , 310-334.

Coplan, R. J. (2000). Assessing nonsocial play in early childhood: Conceptual and

methodological approaches. In A. Sandgrund & K. Gitlin-Weiner (Eds.), Play diagnosis

and assessment (2nd ed., pp.563-598). New York, NY: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.

Coplan, R. J., Bowker, A., & Cooper, S. M. (2003). Parenting daily hassles, child temperament

and social adjustment in preschool. Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 18 , 376-395.

Coplan, R. J., Findlay, L. C., & Nelson, L. J. (2004). Characteristics of Preschoolers With Lower

Perceived Competence. Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology, 32 , 399-408.

Coplan, R. J., Gavinski-Molina, M. H., Lagace-Seguin, D. G., & Wichmann, C. (2001). When

girls versus boys play alone: Nonsocial play and adjustment in kindergarten.

Developmental Psychology, 37 , 464-474.

Coplan, R. J., Prakash, K., ONeil, K., & Armer, M. (2004). Do you want to play?

Distinguishing between conflicted shyness and social disinterest in early childhood.


Coplan, R. J., & Rubin, K. H. (1998). Exploring and assessing nonsocial play in the preschool:

The development and validation of the Preschool Play Behavior Scale.

Social Development, 7 , 72-91.

Coplan, R. J., Rubin, K. H., Fox, N. A., & Calkins, S. D. (1994). Being alone, playing alone, and

acting alone: Distinguishing among reticence and passive and active solitude in young

children. Child Development, 65 , 129-137.

Coplan, R.J., Wichmann, C., Lagace-Seguin, D. (2001). Solitary-active play: A marker variable


22/30

22

for maladjustment in the preschool ? Journal of Research in Childhood Education, 15 ,

164-172.

Dishion, T. J. (1990). The family ecology of boys' peer relations in middle childhood. Child

Development, 61 , 874-892.

Eisenberg, N., Pidada, S., & Liew, J. (2001). The relations of regulation and negative

emotionality to Indonesian children's social functioning. Child Development, 72 , 1747-

1763.

Eisenberg, N., Shepard, S. A., Fabes, R. A., Murphy, B. C., & Guthrie, I. K. (1998). Shyness and

children's emotionality, regulation, and coping: Contemporaneous, longitudinal, and

across-context relations. Child Development, 69 , 767-790.

Eisenberg, N., Spinrad, T. L., Fabes, R. A., Reiser, M., Cumberland, A., Shepard, S. A. et al.

(2004). The Relations of Effortful Control and Impulsivity to Children's Resiliency and

Adjustment. Child Development, 75 , 25-46.

Elias, C. L., & Berk, L. E. (1993). Self-regulation in young children: Is there a role for

sociodramatic play? Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 17 , 216-238.

Fabes, R. A., Hanish, L. D., Martin, C. L., & Eisenberg, N. (2002). Young children's negative

emotionality and social isolation: A latent growth curve analysis. Merrill Palmer

Quarterly, 48 , 284-307.

Fantuzzo, J., Coolahan, K., Mendez, J., McDermott, P., & Sutton-Smith, B. (1998).

Contextually-relevant validation of peer play constructs with African American Head

Start children: Penn Interactive Peer Play Scale. Early Childhood Research Quarterly,

13 , 411-431.

Fox, N. A., Henderson, H. A., Rubin, K. H., Calkins, S. D., & Schmidt, L. A. (2001).


23/30

23

Stability and instability of behavioral inhibition and exuberance: Psychophysiological

and behavioral factors influencing change and continuity across the first four years of

life. Child Development, 72 , 1-21.

Fox, N.A., Rubin, K.H., Calkins, S.D., Marshall, T.R., Coplan, R.J., Porges, S.W., & Long, J.

(1995). Frontal activation asymmetry and social competence at four years of age: Left

frontal hyper and hypo activation as correlates of social behavior in preschool children.

Child Development, 66 , 1770-1784.

Giltin-Weiner, K., Sandgrund, A., & Schaefer, C. (2000). Play diagnosis and assessment (2nd

ed.) New York, NY: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.

Gulranick, M. J., Hammond, M. A., & Connor, R. T. (2003). Subtypes of Nonsocial Play:

Comparisons Between Young Children With and Without Developmental Delays.

American Journal on Mental Retardation, 108 , 347-362.

Gunnar, M. R., Sebanc, A. M., Tout, K., Donzella, B., & van Dulmen, M. M. H., (2003). Peer

Rejection, Temperament, and Cortisol Activity in Preschoolers. Developmental

Psychobiology, 43, 346-358.

Harrist, A. W., Zaia, A. F., Bates, J. E., Dodge, K. A., & Pettit, G. S. (1997). Subtypes of social

withdrawal in early childhood: Sociometric status and social-cognitive differences across

four years. Child Development, 68 , 278-294.

Hart, C. H. (1993). Children on playgrounds: Research perspectives and applications . New

York: State University of New York Press.

Hart, C. H., Yang, C., Nelson, L. J., Robinson, C. C., Olsen, J. A., Nelson, D. A., Porter, C. L.,

Jin S., Olsen, S. F., & Wu, P. (2000). Peer acceptance in early childhood and subtypes of


24/30

24

socially withdrawn behavior in China, Russia, and the United States. International

Journal of Behavioural Development, 24, 73-81.

Henderson, H., Marshall, P., Fox, N.A., & Rubin, K.H. (2004). Converging

psychophysiological and behavioral evidence for subtypes of social withdrawal in

preschoolers. Child Development, 75, 251-263.

Hogan, D. M., & Tudge, T. R. H. (1999). Implications of Vygotsky's theory for peer

learning. In A. King & A. M. O'Donnell (Eds.), The Rutgers Invitational Symposium On

Education Series. Cognitive perspectives on peer learning (pp.39-65). Mahwah, NJ:

Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Howes, C. (1992). The collaborative construction of pretend. New York: State University of

New York Press.

Kagan J., Reznick, J.S., & Snidman, N. (1999). Biological basis of childhood shyness. In D.

Muir & A. Slater (Eds), The Blackwell reader in development psychology (pp.65-78).

Malden, MA: Blackwell Publishers.

Kagan, J., & Saudino, J. (2001). Behavioral inhibition and related temperaments, In J. K. Hewitt

& R. N. Emde (Eds.), Infancy to early childhood: Genetic and environmental influences

on developmental change (pp.111-119). London: Oxford University Press.

Ladd, G. W., & Profilet, S. M. (1996). The Child Behavior Scale: A teacher-report

measure of young childrens aggressive, withdrawn, and prosocial behaviors.


Lamborn, S.D., Mounts, N.S., Steinberg, L., & Dornbusch, S.M. (1991). Patterns of competence

and adjustment among adolescents from authoritative, authoritarian, indulgent and

neglectful families. Child Development, 62 , 1049-1065.


25/30

25

Levy, A. K., Wolfgang, C. H., & Koorland, M. A. (1992). Sociodramatic play as a method for

enhancing the language performance of kindergarten age students. Early Childhood

Research Quarterly, 7 , 245-262.

Lloyd, B., & Howe, N. (2003). Solitary play and convergent and divergent thinking skills in

preschool children. Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 18 , 22-41.

Mead, G.H. (1934). Mind, self, and society . Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

Mills, R. S. L., & Rubin, K. H. (1998). Are behavioural and psychological control both

differentially associated with childhood aggression and social withdrawal? Canadian

Journal of Behavioural Science, 30 , 132-136.

Mize, J., & Pettit, G. S. (1997). Mothers' social coaching, mother-child relationship style, and

children's peer competence: Is the medium the message? Child Development, 68 , 12-332.

Parten, M.B. (1932). Social participation among preschool children. Journal of Abnormal

Psychology, 27, 243-269.

Piaget, J. (1926). The language and thought of the child. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul.

Piaget, J. (1932). The moral judgment of the child. Glencoe: Free Press.

Piaget, J. (1962). Play, dreams, and imitation in childhood . New York: Norton.

Porges, S. W., & Doussard-Roosevelt, J .A. (1997). Early physiological patterns and later

behavior. In M. D. Franzen & H. W. Reese (Eds.), Biological and neuropsychological

mechanisms: Life-span developmental psychology (pp.163-179). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence

Erlbaum Associates.

Renken, B., Egeland, B., Marvinney, D., Sroufe, L.A., & Mangelsdorf, S. (1989). Early

childhood antecedents of aggression and passive withdrawal in early elementary school.

Journal of Personality, 57, 257-281.


26/30


27/30

27

Rubin, K. H., Bukowski, W., & Parker, J. G. (1998). Interactions, relationships, and

groups. In W. Damon (Ed. In chief) & N. Eisenberg, (Vol. Ed.), Handbook of Child

Psychology: Vol 3. Social, Emotional and Personality Development (5 th ed., pp. 619-

700). New York: John Wiley and Sons.

Rubin, K. H., & Burgess, K. B. (2002). Parents of aggressive and withdrawn children. In

M. H. Bornstein (Ed.), Handbook of parenting: Vol. 1 Children and parenting (2nd ed.,

pp.383-418). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates

Rubin, K. H., Burgess, K. B., & Hastings, P. D. (2002). Stability and social-behavioral

consequences of toddlers inhibited temperament and parenting behaviors. Child

Development, 73 , 483-495.

Rubin, K. H., Burgess, K. B., Kennedy, A. E., & Stewart, S. L. (2003). Social withdrawal in

childhood. In R. A. Barkley & E. J. Mash (Eds.), Child psychopathology (2nd ed., pp.372-

406). New York: Guilford Press.

Rubin, K. H., Cheah, C. S. L., & Fox, N. (2001). Emotion regulation, parenting and display of

social reticence in preschoolers. Early Education and Development, 12 , 97-115.

Rubin, K.H., Chen, X., & Hymel, S. (1993). Socioemotional characteristics of withdrawn and

aggressive children. Merrill-Palmer Quarterly, 39, 518-534.

Rubin, K.H., Chen, X., McDougal, P., Bowker, A., & McKinnon, J. (1995). The Waterloo

Longitudinal Project: Predicting internalizing and externalizing problems in adolescence.

Development and Psychopathology, 7 , 751-764 .

Rubin, K.H., Coplan, R.J., Chen, X., Buskirk, A., & Wojslawowicz, J. (in press). Peer

relationships in childhood. In M. Bornstein & M. Lamb (Eds.), Developmental

psychology: An advanced textbook (5th ed.). Hillsdale, N.J.: Erlbaum.


28/30

28

Rubin, K.H., Coplan, R.J., Fox, N.A., & Calkins, S.D. (1995). Emotionality, emotion regulation,

and preschoolers' social adaptation. Development and Psychopathology, 7 , 49-62.

Rubin, K.H., Fein, G., & Vandenberg, B. (1983). Play. In E.M. Hetherington (Ed.), Handbook of

child psychology: Vol 4. Socialization, personality, and social development. New York:

Wiley.

Rubin, K.H., Hymel, S., & Mills, R.S.L. (1989). Sociability and social withdrawal in childhood:

Stability and outcomes. Journal of Personality, 57 , 238-255.

Rubin, K. H., Hymel, S., Mills, R. S. L., & Rose-Krasner, L. (1991).

Rubin, K. H., & Lollis, S. P. (1988). Origins and consequences of social withdrawal. In R.

Nezworski & J. Belsky (Eds.), Clinical implications of attachment (pp.219-252).

Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Rubin, K. H., Maioni, T. L., & Hornung, M. (1976). Free play behaviors in middle- and

lower-class preschoolers: Parten and Piaget revisited. Child Development, 47 , 414-419.

Rubin, K. H., & Mills, R. S. (1991). Conceptualizing developmental pathways to

internalizing disorders in childhood. Canadian Journal of Behavioural Science, 23 , 300-

317.

Rubin, K. H., Nelson, L. J., Hastings, P., & Asendorpf, J. (1999). Transaction between

parents perceptions of their childrens shyness and their parenting styles. International

Journal of Behavioral Development, 23, 937-957.

Rubin, K. H., Watson, K. S., & Jambor, T. W. (1978). Free-play behaviors in preschool

and kindergarten children. Child Development, 49 , 534-536.

Sanson, A., Hemphill, S. A., & Smart, D. (2004). Connections between temperament and

social development: A review. Social Development, 13 , 142-170.


29/30

29

Schmidt, L. A., Fox, N. A., Rubin, K. H., & Sternberg, E. M. (1997). Behavioral and

neuroendocrine responses in shy children. Developmental Psychobiololy, 30 , 127-140.

Schmidt, L. A., & Schulkin, J. (1999). Extreme fear, shyness, and social phobia: Origins,

biological mechanisms, and clinical outcomes . New York: Oxford University Press.

Schwebel, D. C., Rosen, C. S., & Singer, J. L. (1999). Preschoolers' pretend play and theory of

mind: The role of jointly constructed pretence. British Journal of Developmental

Psychology, 17 , 333-348.

Singer, J. L., & Lythcott, M. A. (2002). Fostering school achievement and creativity through

sociodramatic play in the classroom. Research in the Schools, 9 , 43-52.

Smilansky, S. (1968 ). The effects of sociodramatic play on disadvantaged preschool children.

New York: Wiley.

Spangler, G., & Schieche, M. (1998). Emotional and adrenocortical responses of infants to the

strange situation: The differential function of emotional expression. International Journal of

Behavioral Development, 22 , 681-706.

Spinrad, T.L., Eisenberg, N., Harris, E., Hanish, L., Fabes, R.A., Kupanoff, K., Ringwald, S., &

Holmes, J. (2004). The relation of childrens everyday nonsocial peer play behavior to

their emotionality, regulation, and social functioning. Developmental Psychology, 40 ,

6780.

Sroufe, L. A., & Waters, E. (1977). Heart rate as a convergent measure in clinical and

developmental research. Merrill Palmer Quarterly, 23 , 3-27.

Sullivan, H.S. (1953). The interpersonal theory of psychiatry . New York: Norton.

Verry, E.E. (1923). A study of mental and social attitudes in the free play of preschool children.

Thesis for M.A. degree, State University of Iowa.


30/30

30

Sample of Play Observation Scale Coding Sheet

Name of Child:_________________ Age___

Time Sample

:10 :20 :30 :40 :50 :60

uncodable_______________________________________________________________________out of room_____________________________________________________________________transitional_____________________________________________________________________unoccupied______________________________________________________________________onlooker_______________________________________________________________________

Solitary Behaviors:Occupied_________________________________________________________________Constructive______________________________________________________________Exploratory_______________________________________________________________

Functional________________________________________________________________Dramatic_________________________________________________________________Games___________________________________________________________________

Parallel Behaviors:Occupied________________________________________________________________Constructive_____________________________________________________________Exploratory______________________________________________________________Functional_______________________________________________________________Dramatic________________________________________________________________Games__________________________________________________________________

Group Behaviors:

Occupied_________________________________________________________________Constructive______________________________________________________________Exploratory_______________________________________________________________Functional________________________________________________________________Dramatic_________________________________________________________________Games___________________________________________________________________

Peer Conversation __________________________________________________________________

Double Coded Behaviors:AnxiousBehaviors___________________________________________________________Hovering__________________________________________________________________Aggression________________________________________________________________Rough-and-Tumble__________________________________________________________

Conversation/Interacting With : 1_______ 2_______ 3_______ 4________ 5_________ 6_________

Documents

Social Nonsocial Play (1)