Non-Aversive Physical Contact Among Same-Sex Groups

Non-Aversive Physical Contact Among Same-Sex Groups

Dion Loke

IB Psychology HL Y1

September 29, 2009

Word Count: 1915

Abstract

In our study, the aim was to investigate the differences between the non-aversive physical contact among the male social group, and the female social group in elementary school children. We hypothesized that children of the female gender would display more contact among each other than their male counterparts. We selected two tables during lunch, each consisting of only one gender and observed them for two periods of 30 minutes, and recorded their behavior using coding systems. We found out it was true that the children of the female gender engaged in non-aversive physical contact with their peers than the male gender. This could probably be attributed to the social environment that makes us feel that such behavior among female is more acceptable than such behavior among males.

Introduction

This study aimed to investigate the differences in the interactions among male-male social group, and female-female social group through how many times they had non-aversive physical contact. Our study was conducted using via naturalistic observational study methods. In a study of Observations of Aggressive and Nonaggressive Children on the School Playground by Debra J. Pepler, et al. (1998), they observed the differences in behavior and reaction between aggressive and nonaggressive behavior. They had a different natural setting from us. Their focus was also different, and so was their coding system. However, one important discovery they made was that only one gender difference emerged for behaviors. It was that girls engaged in touching twice as frequently as did boys. (Pepler 1998). Another study that was interesting was Same-sex and opposite-sex best friend interactions among high school juniors and seniors by Brenda Lundy, et al.(1998) This study required participants to complete a questionnaire and rate their ‘comfort level’ with friends of the same-sex and friends of the opposite-sex. In the aspect of the same-sex portion, this tied in with our study, as non-aversive physical contact would relate to the ‘comfort level’ between the same-sex friends. In their study, they found that females rated their ‘comfort level’ with female friends higher than males did. We thus hypothesized that the female gender would display more touches in between their friends, compared to the male gender.

Method

Design

As this project was to observe elementary students in their naturalistic environment, it was our focus to conduct an experiment as such. A naturalistic design experiment was beneficial as it allowed us to observe children in their natural environment without external influences, and thus reflected their realistic behavior.

We chose the cafeteria as it gives us a good variety of students to look at. We had in mind that classes in elementary school have very little students. Therefore, by observing them during lunch, we could have a more suitable range of students to observe. On top of this, as we wanted to observe their interactions within their own gender, a cafeteria setting allowed us to do so as they could sit with their own gender. This would be harder in a classroom setting. Moreover, elementary students would interact more during lunch than during class due to the presence of a teacher in class.

However, trying to avoid their attention posed as a challenge. To do so, we observed them from outside the cafeteria, through the windows. Even though if they spotted us, we would not interact with them. This would minimize the intrusive nature of our observations although it did not eliminate it completely.

Ethical concerns including informed consent arise. As this was a naturalistic design experiment, we could not tell the children that we were there to observe them. Instead, we got permission from Mrs. McVean, the Elementary School Principal. (Appendix 1) This would settle part of ethical concerns. Although the children did not know our purpose was to observe the interactions between them, they knew, probably from the surge of visits from high school students, that we were observing them, or conducting a survey of some sort.

To operationalized our behavior focus, we adopted a coding system (Appendix 2) whereby we divided non-aversive physical contact into a few sub-categories, namely, hugs, slaps, pokes, high fives, arm around shoulder, pats on back/shoulder, and holding hands. This is useful for our analysis and during our observation period, as we knew clearly what to look out for. We used event sampling as we found it most appropriate. We were looking out for a range of specific actions, and we would record it down when we see it happening.

Participants

Our sample population is children from the fourth grade in Shanghai American School, Pudong campus. They are international children that have been exposed to cultures other than their own. They come mostly from upper-middle class families. The fourth grade eats at the elementary school cafeteria and has relatively fixed seating which ensured continuity in our two days of observation. We pick two tables, each with only one gender as this fulfils the purpose of our observation.

Materials

For this observation, I compared my observation to two other scientific observation studies (see References), used request letters (Appendix 1) to attain permission for our observation, and coding systems (Appendix 2) to aid us in our observation. We also used the Edexcel book throughout the observation period.

Procedures

1.  Firstly, we settled on our aim of our observation and our focus, which is non-aversive physical contact. We also decided on the grade to observe, and the time to do so.

2.  Secondly, we typed out a request letter to Mrs. McVean to attain permission from her to observe the elementary school students.

3.  We then created a coding system (Appendix 2), and listed out the various types of non-aversive physical contact we wished to record.

4.  On each day, we went before their lunchtime, which lasted between 25 to 30 minutes, waited for them to settle in, and started to record our observations. It was important that we minimized the influence of our presence.

5.  My partner and I each observed different gender groups, one did the male gender, and the other did the female gender group. Our target size was about 15 to 20 people in each gender group.

6.  During the observation period, we constantly looked around the table and paid attention to their behavior throughout lunchtime. When their displayed behavior that corresponded to our coding system, we wrote them down.

7.  After the periods, we tallied up our results and share them with each other. We discussed our results, and analyzed them.

Results

Graph 1: Total tally of both days of non-aversive physical contacts

Graph 2: Day 1 results of the different types of non-aversion physical contact.

Graph 3: Day 2 results of the different types of non-aversion physical contact.

Discussion

Processing our raw data, we obtained the above three graphs. Looking at Graph 1, we could easily tell that the number of non-aversive physical contacts of girls with girls was much larger than the number of non-aversive physical contacts of boys with boys. On Day 1, girls with girls contacts (63) was slightly more than double of the boys on boys contact (31). On Day 2, the number of contacts was slightly more than triple (52 and 17). Both days supports with our hypothesis. Our results are also in line with the scientific studies we found. In the Same-Sex and Opposite-Sex Best Friend Interactions among High School Juniors and Seniors study, authors attributed this pattern to a study by Sharabany et al. (1981), “in which males were found to develop intimacy mere slowly than did females” as males focus less on emotional support and understand, and stress “specific concrete needs”. (Lundy et al., 1998) This is very true as we often show emotional support through non-aversive physical contact like hugs, and high fives. These are also forms of encouragements that we display.

However, breaking down the non-aversive physical contacts into the various types, and portrayed graphically in Graph 2, and 3, one interesting trend can be noticed from the data. Contradictory to our above findings, male students patted each other more often than female students. This is the only type of non-aversive physical contact, which males perform more than females on both days. This prompted me to revisit and think about the different types of non-aversive physical contact we had on our coding system. Looking at the various types, patting is probably the least intimate of the seven we had on our coding system. This does correspond with the reason given by the scientific study mentioned above. It is also interesting to note that more intimate contacts such as hugs and holding hands, male students displayed these forms of contacts significantly less than the female students. Again, it relates to the development of intimacy. Given that our observation was done on children in the fourth grade, and our scientific study reference was done on teenagers of the junior and senior year of high school, we can see that slow intimacy development of the male gender persists throughout the educational years.

It is undeniable that our research had limitations. Firstly, our participants were from a very exclusive class. They are fourth grade children who come from upper-middle class families, and have been exposed to many different cultures. Therefore, children of lower/higher income classes, and/or under one culture exposure may behave very differently. Hence, we could expand our experiment to local schools, and other international school in Shanghai or even other places. We could also expand it to other grade levels. We might also wish to collect bio-data so we can more effectively see relationships between cultures, gender and age.

On top of that, they did see us observing them, which might explain the higher amount of contacts on Day 1, than on Day 2. Also, due to confounding variables like the sudden surge of visiting high school students, they were more active in our presence. This can be improved if they absolutely did not know we were observing, however, we might wish to obtain direct parental permission to do so. On top of this, we only had 1 observer for each table each day. Although we had operationalized our observational study, the one observer was still subjected to bias. Also, as we were observing up to 17 children at once, it might not be that accurate. Therefore, we might want to use more observers.

There were also strengths in this experiment. Having them in naturalistic environment allowed us to observe the undisrupted child behavior. Our coding system also worked pretty well for us as we knew what to look out for. It was important that our coding system did not have too much or too little for us to look out for, as either way, we would not be able to collect accurate and reliable results for analysis.

From this experiment, we may want to expand to non-aversive physical contact of boy on girl and vice versa. We can then compare the difference when they face a member of the same sex and another of the opposite sex. We can also go beyond simply non-aversive physical contact, and go beyond educational age, to see if the trend persists. This can be useful in the military and sports where trust between the various personnel and players are essential. We can investigate social implications, like where we feel more comfortable seeing females on the streets holding hands then males doing so. In our ever-changing society, we may need to give the young new perspectives on same-sex and opposite-sex interactions. From this, we can further explore social issues such as teenage pregnancy, and bullying at school.

In conclusion, our observations were consistent with pervious studies. We see that gender does, in fact, affect our behavior in many ways. In our society where equality is a dominant idea, we might be able to figure out how to play gender-based behavior to increase our efficiency in work, and many other areas.

References

Lundy, B., Field, T., Mcbride, C., Field, T., & Largie, S. (1998). Same-Sex and Opposite-Sex Best Friend Interactions among High School Juniors and Seniors. Adolescence, 33(130), 279+. Retrieved September 28, 2009, from Questia database: http://www.questiaschool.com/PM.qst?a=o&d=5001365724

Pepler, D. J., Craig, W. M., & Roberts, W. L. (1998). Observations of Aggressive and Nonaggressive Children on the School Playground. Merrill-Palmer Quarterly, 44(1), 55. Retrieved September 28, 2009, from Questia database: http://www.questiaschool.com/PM.qst?a=o&d=5001414004

Appendices

Appendix 1

Request Letters

Dear Ms. McVean,
We are two IB Year 1 Psychology students in Ms.Leongs class, and our assignment is to do an observational study on children in elementary school, during lunchtime, playtime or in the classroom. We would like to ask your permission to be allowed to observe and take notes on the Grade Four children during their lunchtime, we won't have any interaction with them, and will be standing outside the cafeteria, looking through the window, so we do not disturb the naturalistic aspect of our observation. It will only be for two days, on Friday and Monday, for a period of 30 minutes each time. If neccasary, we can, in addition, ask the teachers of the Grade Four students in orderinformthem too.
Thank you for your understanding,
Dion Loke and Anika Miller
Grade 11 IB Psychology

Appendix 2

Coding System

Observation Day __
Types of Non-Averssive Physical Contact / Girl with Girl
(Frequency) / Boy with Boy
(Frequency)
Hugs
Slaps
Pokes
High Fives
Arm around shoulder
Pats on Back/Shoulder
Holding Hands
Total Contact

Appendix 3