Validation of the Activity Room: An Ecologically Valid Assessment of Young Children’s Risk-Taking

Casie H. Morgan, Claire Estep, B. Morrongiello, D. Schwebel
{"title":"Validation of the Activity Room: An Ecologically Valid Assessment of Young Children’s Risk-Taking","authors":"Casie H. Morgan, Claire Estep, B. Morrongiello, D. Schwebel","doi":"10.1177/2632077020988143","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Physical risk-taking is associated with increased risk of unintentional injury, a global health challenge and the leading cause of death for children in the United States. To assess risk and develop prevention programs, valid tools to assess children’s physical risk-taking are needed. No ecologically valid behavioral measures are widely available. This study describes the development and validation of the “Activity Room” to measure children’s physical risk-taking while presenting low risk of actual injury. Participants were 59 children aged 4 to 6 years old (51% female; 51% non-Hispanic White) and their parents. Children completed two tasks to assess physical risk-taking: (a) vignettes (short stories presenting risk situations) and (b) the “Activity Room” (unsupervised engagement for 5 min in a room with apparatus designed to stimulate potential physical risk-taking). Parents responded to a questionnaire concerning children’s active play behaviors. Correlational analyses evaluated convergent validity of the Activity Room risk-taking outcome. The Activity Room proved feasible; all children engaged eagerly and safely. Convergent validity was demonstrated through two strategies. First, risk-taking in the Activity Room correlated with observed play behaviors, such as climbing and falling. Second, risk-taking in the Activity Room correlated with children’s risk-taking responses in the vignettes and with parent-reported child risk-taking. Results indicate the Activity Room task is a valid technique to assess young children’s risk-taking in an ecologically valid real-world behavioral task. Incorporation of the task as an assessment tool may benefit a range of studies investigating children’s physical risk-taking behavior, risky decision-making, and child injury prevention strategies.","PeriodicalId":73906,"journal":{"name":"Journal of prevention and health promotion","volume":"21 1","pages":"81 - 99"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-03-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"3","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of prevention and health promotion","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/2632077020988143","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 3

Abstract

Physical risk-taking is associated with increased risk of unintentional injury, a global health challenge and the leading cause of death for children in the United States. To assess risk and develop prevention programs, valid tools to assess children’s physical risk-taking are needed. No ecologically valid behavioral measures are widely available. This study describes the development and validation of the “Activity Room” to measure children’s physical risk-taking while presenting low risk of actual injury. Participants were 59 children aged 4 to 6 years old (51% female; 51% non-Hispanic White) and their parents. Children completed two tasks to assess physical risk-taking: (a) vignettes (short stories presenting risk situations) and (b) the “Activity Room” (unsupervised engagement for 5 min in a room with apparatus designed to stimulate potential physical risk-taking). Parents responded to a questionnaire concerning children’s active play behaviors. Correlational analyses evaluated convergent validity of the Activity Room risk-taking outcome. The Activity Room proved feasible; all children engaged eagerly and safely. Convergent validity was demonstrated through two strategies. First, risk-taking in the Activity Room correlated with observed play behaviors, such as climbing and falling. Second, risk-taking in the Activity Room correlated with children’s risk-taking responses in the vignettes and with parent-reported child risk-taking. Results indicate the Activity Room task is a valid technique to assess young children’s risk-taking in an ecologically valid real-world behavioral task. Incorporation of the task as an assessment tool may benefit a range of studies investigating children’s physical risk-taking behavior, risky decision-making, and child injury prevention strategies.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
活动室的验证:幼儿冒险行为的生态有效评价
身体冒险与意外伤害风险增加有关,这是全球健康挑战,也是美国儿童死亡的主要原因。为了评估风险和制定预防方案,需要有效的工具来评估儿童的身体风险。没有生态有效的行为措施是广泛可用的。本研究描述了“活动室”的开发和验证,以测量儿童的身体冒险,同时呈现低风险的实际伤害。参与者为59名4至6岁的儿童(51%为女性;51%是非西班牙裔白人)和他们的父母。孩子们完成了两项评估身体冒险的任务:(a)小故事(描述危险情况的短篇故事)和(b)“活动室”(在一个房间里无监督的参与5分钟,房间里有设计用来刺激潜在身体冒险的设备)。家长们回答了一份关于孩子们积极玩耍行为的问卷。相关分析评估活动室风险承担结果的收敛效度。活动室证明是可行的;所有的孩子都热切而安全地参与其中。通过两种策略证明了收敛效度。首先,活动室中的冒险行为与观察到的游戏行为(如攀爬和坠落)相关。第二,活动室中的冒险行为与儿童在小片段中的冒险反应和家长报告的儿童冒险行为相关。结果表明活动室任务是评估幼儿在生态有效的现实世界行为任务中的冒险行为的有效方法。将这项任务作为一种评估工具,可能有利于一系列调查儿童身体冒险行为、冒险决策和儿童伤害预防策略的研究。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Disaggregating Data Regarding Suicidal Ideation and Suicide Attempts among Post-9/11 Asian American and Pacific Islander Veterans “Scars on Your Heart and PTSD in Your Mind”: Transmisogynoir and the Well-Being of Black Transgender Women in Los Angeles Feasibility Study of a Mobile Health Parenting Intervention Among Somali/Somali Americans From Refugee Families in the United States Parent-Based Prevention Group to Address Alcohol-Related Sexual Assault Among College Students: A Pilot Study Remembering Steven Danish: A Pioneer in Counseling Psychology
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1