Options
Siblings’ management of conflict in play
Author
Chew, Beth Ai Mei
Supervisor
Gan, Linda
Abstract
The aims of this study are two-fold. Firstly, it examines conflict between three preschool sibling dyads aged between four to six years old during one pretend play and two free play sessions. In the pretend play session, siblings play with a farm set and in the free play sessions, they are free to choose to play with any toys or games they have at home. It also examines the influence of gender and birth order in their conflict strategies. Secondly, it explores siblings’ perceived relationships with each other.
A case study approach was used to yield quantitative and qualitative data on the types of conflict strategies employed by the sibling dyads during free and pretend play and the emotional intensity of their conflict. For each sibling dyad,
three naturalistic observations of their play sessions (i.e. two free play and one pretend play sessions), two puppet interviews and one maternal interview were conducted over four home visits in the order mentioned. In addition, the siblings’ appraisal of their relationships was also analysed.
Constructive strategies were the main conflict strategy used by all three dyads to resolve conflicts in both free play and pretend play situations. Three types of constructive strategies; explanation, justification and submission were consistently used by the dyads in both free play and pretend play.
Destructive strategies were also used but to a lesser extent and passive strategies were the least preferred strategies employed by all dyads in both play contexts. All three dyads consistently used a fewer number of conflict strategies in pretend play than in free play.
Birth order had a greater impact on the type of conflict strategies used by dyads than gender, although it was found that the boy-boy dyad used the most physical aggression compared with the rest of the dyads. Older and younger siblings alike both used constructive and destructive strategies in their conflicts but differed in the specific strategies they employed. Younger siblings were more likely to use submission (constructive strategies) and crying (destructive strategies) to resolve their conflicts. Older siblings were more likely to use distraction (constructive) and verbal aggression in their management of conflict. The different balance of power between the dyads resulted in the younger siblings having to render the help of a third-party to intervene on their behalf in order to resolve their disputes.
All six children reported that they enjoyed a warm sibling relationship with each other even though they used both constructive and destructive strategies in their conflict management. They all exhibited a self-serving bias in that they judged themselves more favourably than their respective siblings in the appraisal of their relationships.
This study provides insights into the types of conflict strategies that young siblings employed in play situations and the influence of gender and birth order in their management of conflict. The study also offers a better understanding of siblings’ perceived relationships with each other.
A case study approach was used to yield quantitative and qualitative data on the types of conflict strategies employed by the sibling dyads during free and pretend play and the emotional intensity of their conflict. For each sibling dyad,
three naturalistic observations of their play sessions (i.e. two free play and one pretend play sessions), two puppet interviews and one maternal interview were conducted over four home visits in the order mentioned. In addition, the siblings’ appraisal of their relationships was also analysed.
Constructive strategies were the main conflict strategy used by all three dyads to resolve conflicts in both free play and pretend play situations. Three types of constructive strategies; explanation, justification and submission were consistently used by the dyads in both free play and pretend play.
Destructive strategies were also used but to a lesser extent and passive strategies were the least preferred strategies employed by all dyads in both play contexts. All three dyads consistently used a fewer number of conflict strategies in pretend play than in free play.
Birth order had a greater impact on the type of conflict strategies used by dyads than gender, although it was found that the boy-boy dyad used the most physical aggression compared with the rest of the dyads. Older and younger siblings alike both used constructive and destructive strategies in their conflicts but differed in the specific strategies they employed. Younger siblings were more likely to use submission (constructive strategies) and crying (destructive strategies) to resolve their conflicts. Older siblings were more likely to use distraction (constructive) and verbal aggression in their management of conflict. The different balance of power between the dyads resulted in the younger siblings having to render the help of a third-party to intervene on their behalf in order to resolve their disputes.
All six children reported that they enjoyed a warm sibling relationship with each other even though they used both constructive and destructive strategies in their conflict management. They all exhibited a self-serving bias in that they judged themselves more favourably than their respective siblings in the appraisal of their relationships.
This study provides insights into the types of conflict strategies that young siblings employed in play situations and the influence of gender and birth order in their management of conflict. The study also offers a better understanding of siblings’ perceived relationships with each other.
Date Issued
2007
Call Number
BF723.S43 Che
Date Submitted
2007