1. Objectifs

Intentions :
« This study investigates the potential role of father-child RTP [rough-and-tumble play] in the development of a child’s capacity to regulate aggression. » (p. 286)

Questions/Hypothèses`:
« It was hypothesized that, among father–child dyads in which a father controls and sets limits during play, the frequency of RTP specifically would be associated with lower levels of physically aggressive behaviors in every-day life. The reverse should be the case among dyads in which fathers are less dominant playmates. » (p. 291)

2. Méthode

Échantillon/Matériau :
L’échantillon comprend 85 dyades père-enfant de la province de Québec. Ils ont été invités à participer à une séance de jeu filmée et à répondre à des questionnaires.

Instruments :
- Questionnaire Père-en-Jeux
- Questionnaire sociodémographique
- Behavior Questionnaire [Tremblay et al., 1992]

Type de traitement des données :
Analyse statistique

3. Résumé

« We found that, indeed, dominance moderated the relationship between RTP and physical aggression. Children were more aggressive as a function of RTP but only if their fathers were relatively less dominant playmates. The results of this study were maintained after controlling for several related variables. It has been widely observed that boys tend to be more -aggressive [Maccoby and Jacklin, 1974] and engage in more RTP than girls [Pellegrini and Smith, 1998]. However, the results indicate that sex did not moderate the relationship between RTP and aggression, even though boys engaged in more RTP than girls. Complementary analyses showed that the age of the child and the overall amount of time the father spent with his child did not influence the findings. In addition, the observed relationship between RTP, dominance and aggression, was not accounted for by play in general. Overall, these results indicate that RTP activities can indeed be associated with behavior problems, as some adults believe [Panksepp, 1993], though these associations likely arise when fathers are unable to contain and impose limits on play interactions. » (p. 291)