Pub Date : 2024-04-25DOI: 10.3389/fetho.2024.1382533
Margot Poirier, M. Grandgeorge, N. François, Florian Auffret, Noël Champagne, Alain Legrand, Catherine Deschatelets, Nathalie Favier-Hannequin, Aurélie Tremblay, Fanny Kearnan, Séverine Henry, P. Plusquellec, Nicolas Dollion
Parents of children with Autism Spectrum Disorder (ASD) have parenting styles that differ from parents of typically developing children. Integration of a service dog (SD) at home has been demonstrated as having multiple effects within families of children with ASD. Our aims were to investigate if (a) specific parenting styles can be identified during parents’ interactions with their child with ASD using ethological methods, and (b) integration of a SD have an effect on these styles.Behavioural coding was performed on videos recorded at home by 20 parents of 6-12-years old children with ASD before SD integration. Parents were asked to record themselves and their child while making a puzzle. 14 parents performed a second similar recording 3-6 months after SD integration. Data were analysed using Principal Component Analysis, Hierarchical Cluster Analysis and non-parametric tests.Three parenting styles emerged: Parents Involved in the Task (PIT), Parents Relaxed in the Interaction (PRI), and Parents Disengaged from the Interaction (PDI). PIT were characterised as more controlling and verbally focused on the activity. PRI were less controlling and talk about things other than the activity. The same applied to PDI, except that they were less warm in their interactions. Analysis performed after SD integration revealed that these groups also diverged in the evolution of certain behaviours.This study is the first to demonstrate that behavioural observations can highlight different parenting styles in caregivers of children with ASD, and that the integration of a SD has effects on these styles, with variation according to parents’ style prior to SD integration. Indeed, a decrease in activity control behaviours was observed in parents with an initial profile characterise by higher expression of such behaviours (i.e., PIT), while an increase of those behaviours was observed in parents initially with an initial profile characterise by a weaker expression of such behaviours (i.e., PRI). Interestingly, the last profile characterized by less engagement in the interaction and activity (i.e., PDI) did not seem to show significant changes.
{"title":"Parenting styles in caregivers of children with Autism Spectrum Disorder and effects of service dogs","authors":"Margot Poirier, M. Grandgeorge, N. François, Florian Auffret, Noël Champagne, Alain Legrand, Catherine Deschatelets, Nathalie Favier-Hannequin, Aurélie Tremblay, Fanny Kearnan, Séverine Henry, P. Plusquellec, Nicolas Dollion","doi":"10.3389/fetho.2024.1382533","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.3389/fetho.2024.1382533","url":null,"abstract":"Parents of children with Autism Spectrum Disorder (ASD) have parenting styles that differ from parents of typically developing children. Integration of a service dog (SD) at home has been demonstrated as having multiple effects within families of children with ASD. Our aims were to investigate if (a) specific parenting styles can be identified during parents’ interactions with their child with ASD using ethological methods, and (b) integration of a SD have an effect on these styles.Behavioural coding was performed on videos recorded at home by 20 parents of 6-12-years old children with ASD before SD integration. Parents were asked to record themselves and their child while making a puzzle. 14 parents performed a second similar recording 3-6 months after SD integration. Data were analysed using Principal Component Analysis, Hierarchical Cluster Analysis and non-parametric tests.Three parenting styles emerged: Parents Involved in the Task (PIT), Parents Relaxed in the Interaction (PRI), and Parents Disengaged from the Interaction (PDI). PIT were characterised as more controlling and verbally focused on the activity. PRI were less controlling and talk about things other than the activity. The same applied to PDI, except that they were less warm in their interactions. Analysis performed after SD integration revealed that these groups also diverged in the evolution of certain behaviours.This study is the first to demonstrate that behavioural observations can highlight different parenting styles in caregivers of children with ASD, and that the integration of a SD has effects on these styles, with variation according to parents’ style prior to SD integration. Indeed, a decrease in activity control behaviours was observed in parents with an initial profile characterise by higher expression of such behaviours (i.e., PIT), while an increase of those behaviours was observed in parents initially with an initial profile characterise by a weaker expression of such behaviours (i.e., PRI). Interestingly, the last profile characterized by less engagement in the interaction and activity (i.e., PDI) did not seem to show significant changes.","PeriodicalId":503757,"journal":{"name":"Frontiers in Ethology","volume":"18 2","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2024-04-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"140658605","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2024-04-22DOI: 10.3389/fetho.2024.1362052
S. Pellis, V. Pellis, Jackson R Ham
Play fighting has been one of the most intensely studied forms of play and so has provided some of our deepest insights into the understanding of play in general. As the label implies, this behavior resembles serious fighting, in that the animals compete for an advantage over one another, but unlike true aggression, for play fighting to remain playful, it also incorporates a degree of cooperation and reciprocity – restrained competition seems to be its hallmark. Despite these common features, it should be noted that both the advantage competed over and the mechanisms by which restraint is achieved varies across species. Such variation mitigates simple generalities. For example, how empirical support for a proposed adaptive function in one species not being replicated in another, is to be interpreted. What has emerged over the past few decades is that play fighting is diverse, varying across several dimensions, some superficial, some fundamental, making choosing species to compare a challenge. In this paper, we explore various design features that constitute play fighting and the ways these can be modified across different species and lineages of species. Given that a major pillar of ethology is that description precedes explanation, having a good grasp of the behavioral diversity of play fighting is an essential starting point for detailed analyses of the mechanisms and functions of play. We show that commonalities across species likely involve different mechanisms than do species idiosyncrasies, and that different styles of play fighting likely afford different adaptive opportunities.
{"title":"Play fighting revisited: its design features and how they shape our understanding of its mechanisms and functions","authors":"S. Pellis, V. Pellis, Jackson R Ham","doi":"10.3389/fetho.2024.1362052","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.3389/fetho.2024.1362052","url":null,"abstract":"Play fighting has been one of the most intensely studied forms of play and so has provided some of our deepest insights into the understanding of play in general. As the label implies, this behavior resembles serious fighting, in that the animals compete for an advantage over one another, but unlike true aggression, for play fighting to remain playful, it also incorporates a degree of cooperation and reciprocity – restrained competition seems to be its hallmark. Despite these common features, it should be noted that both the advantage competed over and the mechanisms by which restraint is achieved varies across species. Such variation mitigates simple generalities. For example, how empirical support for a proposed adaptive function in one species not being replicated in another, is to be interpreted. What has emerged over the past few decades is that play fighting is diverse, varying across several dimensions, some superficial, some fundamental, making choosing species to compare a challenge. In this paper, we explore various design features that constitute play fighting and the ways these can be modified across different species and lineages of species. Given that a major pillar of ethology is that description precedes explanation, having a good grasp of the behavioral diversity of play fighting is an essential starting point for detailed analyses of the mechanisms and functions of play. We show that commonalities across species likely involve different mechanisms than do species idiosyncrasies, and that different styles of play fighting likely afford different adaptive opportunities.","PeriodicalId":503757,"journal":{"name":"Frontiers in Ethology","volume":"36 25","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2024-04-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"140673231","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2024-03-05DOI: 10.3389/fetho.2024.1341120
Maria Eduarda Lima Vieira, S. Chameron, Nicolas Châline
Since Tinbergen’s seminal contribution in 1963, ethology has blossomed as a multifaceted research field. Sixty years later, uncountable articles followed the four questions proposed as necessary for understanding animal behaviour, and they culminated in the segmentation of subareas which communicate little among themselves. Foraging in ants is one example where this division happened, despite the clear need to integrate results obtained from different approaches. We chose this research subject to revise the literature, relating the main results to the relevant level of explanation in Tinbergen’s four questions theoretical framework. Through such revision, we aim to foster the integration of different approaches and to bring to light how this can clarify how we understand foraging behaviour, sixty years after Tinbergen’s initial proposition.
{"title":"The ethology of foraging in ants: revisiting Tinbergen’s four questions","authors":"Maria Eduarda Lima Vieira, S. Chameron, Nicolas Châline","doi":"10.3389/fetho.2024.1341120","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.3389/fetho.2024.1341120","url":null,"abstract":"Since Tinbergen’s seminal contribution in 1963, ethology has blossomed as a multifaceted research field. Sixty years later, uncountable articles followed the four questions proposed as necessary for understanding animal behaviour, and they culminated in the segmentation of subareas which communicate little among themselves. Foraging in ants is one example where this division happened, despite the clear need to integrate results obtained from different approaches. We chose this research subject to revise the literature, relating the main results to the relevant level of explanation in Tinbergen’s four questions theoretical framework. Through such revision, we aim to foster the integration of different approaches and to bring to light how this can clarify how we understand foraging behaviour, sixty years after Tinbergen’s initial proposition.","PeriodicalId":503757,"journal":{"name":"Frontiers in Ethology","volume":"62 7","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2024-03-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"140264543","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：